Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
Brilliant Chris, you found it. How did you manage to get in there? Wileys always shuts me out. http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/122260824/HTMLSTART Sociological Inquiry Volume 79, Issue 2, Pages 142-162 Published Online: 13 Mar 2009 There Must Be a Reason: Osama, Saddam, and Inferred Justification Monica Prasad 1 , Andrew J. Perrin 2 , Kieran Bezila 1 , Steve G. Hoffman 3 , Kate Kindleberger 1 , Kim Manturuk 2 and Ashleigh Smith Powers 4 1 Northwestern University 2 University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill 3 University at Buffalo, State University of New York (SUNY) 4 Millsaps College ABSTRACT One of the most curious aspects of the 2004 presidential election was the strength and resilience of the belief among many Americans that Saddam Hussein was linked to the terrorist attacks of September 11. Scholars have suggested that this belief was the result of a campaign of false information and innuendo from the Bush administration. We call this the information environment explanation. Using a technique of challenge interviews on a sample of voters who reported believing in a link between Saddam and 9/11, we propose instead a social psychological explanation for the belief in this link. We identify a number of social psychological mechanisms voters use to maintain false beliefs in the face of disconfirming information, and we show that for a subset of voters the main reason to believe in the link was that it made sense of the administration's decision to go to war against Iraq. We call this inferred justification: for these voters, the fact of the war led to a search for a justification for it, which led them to infer the existence of ties between Iraq and 9/11. [more] Nice terms... disconfirming information, aka inconvenient truths (which has become a spinners' term), motivational reasoning, ie cherry-picking the facts to fit the belief. Useful study, but a little odd, as if they're working in a sort of vacuum. They study the effects without seeking the cause or asking how or why it's done, as if it's self-administered, just something that happens to people, like catching a cold. That it's not, it's the product of a massive industry worth trillions. A strangely invisible industry, how convenient. ok, i googled SI, did a search of their website and found the article. i'm pretty sure it's the one paul roberts is referring to. it dates from 13 March of this year, so wonder whether it isn't another exercise entirely from the one i heard about. it was over a year ago, sometime in 2007 i think. you make a good point about liberal big lies. it's something i've given some thought to. clearly they must exist (though, in the u.s.a., there are certain semantic issues with the category left/liberal, rather more so than with right/conservative). How about New Right/conservative? I don't think right/conservative used to include the likes of what Robert called the howling monkeys, aka the violently ignorant (both factors induced). I suppose it did include the likes of the KKK, but I don't think they howl, do they? On the other hand, Rush Limbaugh just said we need to move forward to segretated buses. :-( Liberal is a bit of an awkward term, things like neo-liberal economics and trade liberalisation give it a bad press, and the libertarians muddy it some more. Leftwingers in the US often talk of progressives. As opposed to what, regressives? And left of what? I don't think the centre is in the same place in the US as elsewhere. Maybe the left needs a rebrand. At least a Nazi can say he's a Nazi and nobody's in any doubt about what it means. Leftwing? Are you a socialist? Are you a communist? (That's what John Bolton asked John Pilger after an interview in which Pilger confronted him with what There Must Be a Reason calls correct answers.) Or, are you a socialist fascist? (A whole new species, must be a GMO.) I wonder how many liberals also believe the rightwing myth that the mainstream US media have a liberal bias etc. The aberrant mythology on the right doesn't necessarily stay on the right. The right's spinmeisters are much more savvy (very smart dumb guys) - well, just savvy, the left doesn't really have spinmeisters as such, and it's not very good at dealing with spin. Even if the spin itself bounces off a leftie, it's often the other side that gets to set the terms of the debate anyway: take it up and you've already lost. The left tends to be so steeped in its intellect and facts and stuff that they can't resist. But, as There Must Be a Reason says, it's not a discussion (information environment), it's emotional (social psychological), the facts aren't important. Very dumb smart guys, blind to low cunning. So everybody's being dumb in one way or the other: the left is outmanoeuvred to a virtual standstill, and supporters of the right play into the hands of folks (?) who do not have their best interests at heart. The
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
lol, i don't know. normally, i can't get anywhere at science publication websites either. it's possible, and i meant to mention this when i posted the url, that they gave it to me because there was a link for some sort of free subscription whereby you could get access to a large number of SI's issues. so perhaps this article fits that category and, though i didn't bother with the freebie, the server saw no reason not to give me the article. i can try and retrace my steps if you want, just let me know. ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
would that be the original publication of the study? no. I'll keep an eye out. i first heard of it on a program called 'ring of fire', hosted by robert f. kennedy, jr. and mike papantonio. i've heard them a few times, they seem to do good work. It seems they do, thankyou. http://airamerica.com/ringoffire anyway, they spent an hour on the topic. i then heard another program which discussed it, but can't remember which one that might have been. anyway, by that point i'd sort had my fill of it, so to speak. that mythmaking 101 is an interesting little article. will have to make an effort to read barthes at some point. Somebody ought to put all this stuff together in a single, integrated, accessible resource, all about spin. Like an online course, unspin yourself and learn some self-defence, start here, everything you need to know. Same as physical health, we live in a toxic soup, you need to know how to detoxify your body and beef up your immune system. We live in a toxic soup of spin too, we're emotionally diseased. IMHO it's THE problem. Maybe it's something I could do bit by bit on the back-burner in the meantime (ie until time isn't so mean). I think I have most of what's needed to hand, much of it free, links to the rest at amazon or wherever. Often there are DVDs too, as with Chomsky's Manufacturing Consent, eg. Some good docus on DVD, though all I can find for Adam Curtis, who's rather essential, is 10 hours of Youtube, aarghh! There are lots of good articles for online reading, though they'd need sorting, and great stuff in the list archives (even more sorting). Links to online checking resources like SourceWatch and others. I'll think about it. It won't be quick, , but even the beginnings of such a resource could be useful, get the core stuff online first, quite easy, then keep adding to it as and when. We'll see. Best Keith ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
ok, i googled SI, did a search of their website and found the article. i'm pretty sure it's the one paul roberts is referring to. it dates from 13 March of this year, so wonder whether it isn't another exercise entirely from the one i heard about. it was over a year ago, sometime in 2007 i think. you make a good point about liberal big lies. it's something i've given some thought to. clearly they must exist (though, in the u.s.a., there are certain semantic issues with the category left/liberal, rather more so than with right/conservative). they're very hard to pin down, though. i mean, there's the gulf of tonkin (for example), which was lbj's baby. so technically it qualifies as a liberal big lie, i guess? at least by one definition of the word. yet there were large numbers of liberals who opposed the war. i tend to think that the closest equivalent to the bush/cheney/rumsfeld et al big lie, in terms of scope and apparent untarnishability, might be the jfk myth. anyway, try the following url: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/122260824/HTMLSTART ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
yeah, that was a very interesting study. it got some play on the alternative radio over here when it was published. there was one individual who suggested that more investigation was needed such as, for starters, a duplication of the study built around a left-wing/liberal big lie (as opposed to the right-wing/conservative big lie of the original study). would it reinforce the findings of the first study? or would it point instead to the possibility that inflexibility and intolerance are in some way inherent to being politically conservative (iirc, according to this individual it has something to do with right-brain vs. left-brain thinking)? :-) Everybody who can't think of any examples of a left-wing/liberal big lie please step to the, uh, left... Here's someone who thinks he suffers from such a thing: Mythmaking 101: Why Millions Have Bought into 'Death Panel' Propaganda By Kenny Smith, Religion Dispatches Posted on September 17, 2009, Printed on September 17, 2009 http://www.alternet.org/story/142665/ ... Supporters such as myself, for instance, often claim with considerable confidence that current legislation will make high-quality health care available to everyone, bring medical costs under control, end unethical practices among insurers, and move American society toward a more humane position. While not as vitriolic [as the howling monkeys], I suspect a similar kind of mythmaking is at work here. We have drained away much of the specific language of the bill, and imported into it the things we value (e.g., a society that looks more like that of the Western European societies Michael Moore shows us in Sicko). Hence there exists some tension between our own mythological construct and the actual bill. Finally, we may be more interested in our own health care myths than in the stark realities of the actual health care system. Indeed, I found Sicko to be quite inspiring, and it is tempting to spend my energies contemplating my health care myths at the expense of health care legislation realities. [more] I read Barthes' Mythologies ages ago, I'd quite forgotten it. FYI you can download it here, if you register: http://www.scribd.com/document_downloads/4612523?extension=pdfskip_interstitial=true You didn't happen across a copy of the Sociological Inquiry article, did you Chris? Best Keith ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
would that be the original publication of the study? no. i first heard of it on a program called 'ring of fire', hosted by robert f. kennedy, jr. and mike papantonio. i've heard them a few times, they seem to do good work. anyway, they spent an hour on the topic. i then heard another program which discussed it, but can't remember which one that might have been. anyway, by that point i'd sort had my fill of it, so to speak. that mythmaking 101 is an interesting little article. will have to make an effort to read barthes at some point. ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
then. If you were the mastermind, would you bank on that? What Sibel Edmonds talked and didn't talk about could just have been a minor interest group trying to protect itself. One of the objections to most of the conspiracy theories is the high level of improbability that they could have been accomplished with the level of security required. Such as massive buildings being laced with controlled demolition explosives, yet nobody saw anything and none of the experts and workers who did it leaked since, not a single word. If explosives were used, where did they come from? That's not untraceable, but was any attempt even made to find out? And so on and on. GStull said David Griffin looks at 9/11 as a crime scene and examines every aspect of the event fairly and in minute detail, but how could he do that? The evidence was no longer there, the crime scene itself was no longer there - all he had to go on were reports from the crime scene, reports of the evidence that was found, all second-hand. If he even had that (I don't think so). Yet he'd find all sorts of things that 7,000 very well-resourced professional crime investigators at the scene failed to find, hm. Of course it wasn't the FBI investigators that wrote the FBI report, but it's hard to check the one against the other if you don't have access to the investigation material itself. The FBI said there was overwhelming evidence that Al Qaida did it, yet there's also overwhelming evidence that Al Qaida didn't actually exist, or not at the time anyway, and certainly not in that form (the worldwide sleeper-cell network etc). Bin Laden's little group of ultra-radicals in Afghanistan hardly fitted the bill, and didn't have much influence anyway. Most of the jihadists there had no interest in attacking the US, their grievances were local, in their own countries. And elsewhere the FBI says they have no evidence linking Bin Laden with 9/11. Meanwhile the stuff that could be investigated isn't, much. Such as the possibility of an Israel connection, which gets bandied about quite a lot, but no new evidence is forthcoming that might give it some substance. Similarly with the extremely odd fact that all it took to attack what must surely be the most heavily and powerfully defended place there's ever been was a stolen jet and a boxcutter. MadDogMarine was at least pointing in that direction, but he screwed it up. Leaving us with this: We know the planes hits the towers. That's about it... That's why I took that position, if you're going to stick to facts it's the only position you can defend. You'll be accused of defending the official version though, as I was. :-) Conspiracies, sigh. Whenever I get into this kind of stuff I get the feeling that conspiracism is itself a conspiracy. It's certainly very conveniently excellent at misdirection and muddying the waters . All best Keith Regards, Bob. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Keith Addison Sent: Sunday, 13 September 2009 8:58 a.m. To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event Hi Bob www.examiner.com/x-18425-LA-County-Nonpartisan-Examiner~y2009m9d10-Who-are - 911-Truthers-What-is-the-911-Truth-Movement http://tinyurl.com/pvpjkv http://tinyurl.com/r2bcob Here you go: http://www.examiner.com/x-18425-LA-County-Nonpartisan-Examiner~y2009m9d10-W ho-are-911-Truthers-What-is-the-911-Truth-Movement Snipurl: http://snipurl.com/rs6y0 Tinyurl: http://tinyurl.com/q9hsep I prefer Snipurl, but they both work well. Hi Keith/Bruno et al, Your points well taken, n'less the smell seems to be growing hence the website above. Re posting big items: wasn't aware we suffered a space shortage. No space shortage, I think Bruno meant big in the sense of weighty or troublesome. Actually there is a size limit on messages, it's set at 100 kb, not very small. As for the pros and cons of the issue, the title of the thread suggested the bunfight was far from over hence my additional tuppence worth. I'm still sitting on the fence and hoping someone, somewhere will provide a definitive answer. I've yet to see it. That's right, sad to say. I doubt there'll be a breakthrough any time soon. A Mother Jones writer pointed out that this is the first 9/11 anniversary when the country is no longer being run by those who so cynically exploited horror and legitimate anger. http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2009/09/911-truth-trutherism-and-truthiness Not to presume that the current bunch are above cynically exploiting horror and legitimate anger, but a lot of the steam might go out of it with Bush-Cheney no longer in the hot seat. I'd like to see an update of the 2006 Scripps poll: Third of Americans suspect 9-11 government conspiracy, 08/01/2006 http://www.scrippsnews.com/911poll. Earlier polls put it much higher than a third - some reported that as many as 89% thought
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
yeah, that was a very interesting study. it got some play on the alternative radio over here when it was published. there was one individual who suggested that more investigation was needed such as, for starters, a duplication of the study built around a left-wing/liberal big lie (as opposed to the right-wing/conservative big lie of the original study). would it reinforce the findings of the first study? or would it point instead to the possibility that inflexibility and intolerance are in some way inherent to being politically conservative (iirc, according to this individual it has something to do with right-brain vs. left-brain thinking)? ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
Hi Bob Thanks Keith, Snipurl does the trick. Good! :-) As for the rest, your summing up is superb. We know the planes hits the towers. That's about it and no-one in government is interested in exposing the dirty tricks brigade (though Sibel Edmonds might just come through). Maybe - Turkish stuff, I wonder how far that might lead. An Inconvenient Patriot - David Rose, Vanity Fair, September 2005 http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article9774.htm Meanwhile, I wouldn't say 7,000 FBI investigators can't be wrong, but I also wouldn't say that they could all be complicit in a cover-up, with no leaks or squeaks in the 8 years since then. If you were the mastermind, would you bank on that? What Sibel Edmonds talked and didn't talk about could just have been a minor interest group trying to protect itself. One of the objections to most of the conspiracy theories is the high level of improbability that they could have been accomplished with the level of security required. Such as massive buildings being laced with controlled demolition explosives, yet nobody saw anything and none of the experts and workers who did it leaked since, not a single word. If explosives were used, where did they come from? That's not untraceable, but was any attempt even made to find out? And so on and on. GStull said David Griffin looks at 9/11 as a crime scene and examines every aspect of the event fairly and in minute detail, but how could he do that? The evidence was no longer there, the crime scene itself was no longer there - all he had to go on were reports from the crime scene, reports of the evidence that was found, all second-hand. If he even had that (I don't think so). Yet he'd find all sorts of things that 7,000 very well-resourced professional crime investigators at the scene failed to find, hm. Of course it wasn't the FBI investigators that wrote the FBI report, but it's hard to check the one against the other if you don't have access to the investigation material itself. The FBI said there was overwhelming evidence that Al Qaida did it, yet there's also overwhelming evidence that Al Qaida didn't actually exist, or not at the time anyway, and certainly not in that form (the worldwide sleeper-cell network etc). Bin Laden's little group of ultra-radicals in Afghanistan hardly fitted the bill, and didn't have much influence anyway. Most of the jihadists there had no interest in attacking the US, their grievances were local, in their own countries. And elsewhere the FBI says they have no evidence linking Bin Laden with 9/11. Meanwhile the stuff that could be investigated isn't, much. Such as the possibility of an Israel connection, which gets bandied about quite a lot, but no new evidence is forthcoming that might give it some substance. Similarly with the extremely odd fact that all it took to attack what must surely be the most heavily and powerfully defended place there's ever been was a stolen jet and a boxcutter. MadDogMarine was at least pointing in that direction, but he screwed it up. Leaving us with this: We know the planes hits the towers. That's about it... That's why I took that position, if you're going to stick to facts it's the only position you can defend. You'll be accused of defending the official version though, as I was. :-) Conspiracies, sigh. Whenever I get into this kind of stuff I get the feeling that conspiracism is itself a conspiracy. It's certainly very conveniently excellent at misdirection and muddying the waters . All best Keith Regards, Bob. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Keith Addison Sent: Sunday, 13 September 2009 8:58 a.m. To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event Hi Bob www.examiner.com/x-18425-LA-County-Nonpartisan-Examiner~y2009m9d10-Who-are - 911-Truthers-What-is-the-911-Truth-Movement http://tinyurl.com/pvpjkv http://tinyurl.com/r2bcob Here you go: http://www.examiner.com/x-18425-LA-County-Nonpartisan-Examiner~y2009m9d10-W ho-are-911-Truthers-What-is-the-911-Truth-Movement Snipurl: http://snipurl.com/rs6y0 Tinyurl: http://tinyurl.com/q9hsep I prefer Snipurl, but they both work well. Hi Keith/Bruno et al, Your points well taken, n'less the smell seems to be growing hence the website above. Re posting big items: wasn't aware we suffered a space shortage. No space shortage, I think Bruno meant big in the sense of weighty or troublesome. Actually there is a size limit on messages, it's set at 100 kb, not very small. As for the pros and cons of the issue, the title of the thread suggested the bunfight was far from over hence my additional tuppence worth. I'm still sitting on the fence and hoping someone, somewhere will provide a definitive answer. I've yet to see it. That's right, sad to say. I doubt there'll be a breakthrough any
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
Hi Bob Just to add to the stew: in New Zealand (the clean, green, much-boasted nuclear-free land of absolute neutrality) a journalist was held in a mental hospital as delusional for saying that 9/11 was an inside job. http://snipurl.com/rtcnj I was wrongly diagnosed as delusional by the psychiatric staff of Ward 7 at Northland Base Hospital in Whangarei and held against my will for 11 days in mid-2006, because I maintained the attacks of 9/11 were orchestrated by criminal elements inside the US Administration. Is she actually a journalist? Uncensored Magazine | Clare Swinney Clare Swinney has written 748 posts for Uncensored Magazine http://uncensored.co.nz/author/clare-swinney/ Uncensored Magazine is just another 9/11 conspiracy rag (founded by a porn king and a suppressed inventions conspiracist). Other magazines have rejected Clare Swinney's offerings. Has she ever worked as a professional journalist? The mental hospital story sounds chilling, but is that quite what happened? The statement she made that 9/11 was an inside job wasn't made in a news report, it was a rather substance-free complaint she made to TVNZ, and then to the Broadcasting Standards Authority when TVNZ didn't agree with her. See: http://www.bsa.govt.nz/decisions/2006/2006-011.htm. Here's her evidence: http://i480.photobucket.com/albums/rr163/KiwiClare/SCAN0012.jpg, but how exactly did the BSA rejection of her complaint lead to her being detained (was she detained?) at the mental hospital? I'm sure BSA was a little irritated at having their time wasted (they had to watch 2 DVDs of conspiracist stuff), but they'd hardly get so cross they'd call in the shrinks to put her in a rubber room. There's not much else to be found about it, which is a bit surprising if she's to be believed. IMHO she's not to be believed. Anyway, she is delusional - all conspiracists are delusional, by definition, and she's certainly a conspiracist, there are no proved or provable facts to support her views, which she's clearly convinced are factual, but they're not factual, it's all conjectural. As we've just been establishing. That doesn't mean it's pathological though, something to be diagnosed. Everybody to some extent believes things that in another part of their minds they know aren't true, but it's harmless, and it'd probably be difficult to get along otherwise, as with the little white lies that everyone tells. No way of knowing which bracket Clare Swinney might fall into. Whatever, I don't think all this adds up to suppression of her views by TPTB in order to silence her, though I'm sure she intends to give that impression. That would be both naive and futile (TPTB are not usually naive or futile). Why would they give a shit anyway? Naah. Best Keith -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Keith Addison Sent: Sunday, 13 September 2009 8:58 a.m. To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event Hi Bob www.examiner.com/x-18425-LA-County-Nonpartisan-Examiner~y2009m9d10-Who-are - 911-Truthers-What-is-the-911-Truth-Movement http://tinyurl.com/pvpjkv http://tinyurl.com/r2bcob Here you go: http://www.examiner.com/x-18425-LA-County-Nonpartisan-Examiner~y2009m9d10-W ho-are-911-Truthers-What-is-the-911-Truth-Movement Snipurl: http://snipurl.com/rs6y0 Tinyurl: http://tinyurl.com/q9hsep I prefer Snipurl, but they both work well. Hi Keith/Bruno et al, Your points well taken, n'less the smell seems to be growing hence the website above. Re posting big items: wasn't aware we suffered a space shortage. No space shortage, I think Bruno meant big in the sense of weighty or troublesome. Actually there is a size limit on messages, it's set at 100 kb, not very small. As for the pros and cons of the issue, the title of the thread suggested the bunfight was far from over hence my additional tuppence worth. I'm still sitting on the fence and hoping someone, somewhere will provide a definitive answer. I've yet to see it. That's right, sad to say. I doubt there'll be a breakthrough any time soon. A Mother Jones writer pointed out that this is the first 9/11 anniversary when the country is no longer being run by those who so cynically exploited horror and legitimate anger. http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2009/09/911-truth-trutherism-and-truthiness Not to presume that the current bunch are above cynically exploiting horror and legitimate anger, but a lot of the steam might go out of it with Bush-Cheney no longer in the hot seat. I'd like to see an update of the 2006 Scripps poll: Third of Americans suspect 9-11 government conspiracy, 08/01/2006 http://www.scrippsnews.com/911poll. Earlier polls put it much higher than a third - some reported that as many as 89% thought the government was lying or complicit (CNN poll, 2004). But there's less pressure now, there might
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
Thanks Keith, Snipurl does the trick. As for the rest, your summing up is superb. We know the planes hits the towers. That's about it and no-one in government is interested in exposing the dirty tricks brigade (though Sibel Edmonds might just come through). Regards, Bob. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Keith Addison Sent: Sunday, 13 September 2009 8:58 a.m. To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event Hi Bob www.examiner.com/x-18425-LA-County-Nonpartisan-Examiner~y2009m9d10-Who-are - 911-Truthers-What-is-the-911-Truth-Movement http://tinyurl.com/pvpjkv http://tinyurl.com/r2bcob Here you go: http://www.examiner.com/x-18425-LA-County-Nonpartisan-Examiner~y2009m9d10-W ho-are-911-Truthers-What-is-the-911-Truth-Movement Snipurl: http://snipurl.com/rs6y0 Tinyurl: http://tinyurl.com/q9hsep I prefer Snipurl, but they both work well. Hi Keith/Bruno et al, Your points well taken, n'less the smell seems to be growing hence the website above. Re posting big items: wasn't aware we suffered a space shortage. No space shortage, I think Bruno meant big in the sense of weighty or troublesome. Actually there is a size limit on messages, it's set at 100 kb, not very small. As for the pros and cons of the issue, the title of the thread suggested the bunfight was far from over hence my additional tuppence worth. I'm still sitting on the fence and hoping someone, somewhere will provide a definitive answer. I've yet to see it. That's right, sad to say. I doubt there'll be a breakthrough any time soon. A Mother Jones writer pointed out that this is the first 9/11 anniversary when the country is no longer being run by those who so cynically exploited horror and legitimate anger. http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2009/09/911-truth-trutherism-and-truthiness Not to presume that the current bunch are above cynically exploiting horror and legitimate anger, but a lot of the steam might go out of it with Bush-Cheney no longer in the hot seat. I'd like to see an update of the 2006 Scripps poll: Third of Americans suspect 9-11 government conspiracy, 08/01/2006 http://www.scrippsnews.com/911poll. Earlier polls put it much higher than a third - some reported that as many as 89% thought the government was lying or complicit (CNN poll, 2004). But there's less pressure now, there might not be an updated poll, and if there is one the figures could be lower. The protesters, if that's the word, have failed to build up the kind of mass movement that might have forced a serious re-examination of what happened, and it's rather unlikely that Obama will take the initiative in questioning the official version. Though I hope not, it could just wind down to a core of diehards who go on and on thumping away about thermite dust and Building 7 and Mossad and so on and everybody else takes about as much notice as they do of all the other conspiracy theories, like who killed the Kennedys (Bill Moyers just said conspiracy theories are as American as apple pie). n'less the smell seems to be growing... I think we have good news noses, you and I, and smell is the right word for this - the whole thing stinks, it did right from the start. I simply don't believe anything beyond the bald facts, that the jets hit the buildings, everything else is just murk and suspicion - the conspiracists get the murk, and everything official gets the suspicion. Meanwhile the death toll keeps mounting - 2,752 at the WTC itself, and these are the current ICH figures: Number Of Iraqis Slaughtered Since The U.S. Invaded Iraq - 1,339,771 Number of U.S. Military Personnel Sacrificed (Officially acknowledged) In America's War On Iraq: 4,661 Number Of International Occupation Force Troops Slaughtered In Afghanistan: 1,378 How many Afghans killed? And Pakistanis? Obama's ratcheting it up in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and he's NOT winding Iraq down - more private contractors (mercenaries) are being moved in than US troops are being moved out. Somehow I think a lot more people than that have died because of 9/11. Will this just go on and on happening until the real truth about 9/11 finally emerges and perhaps upsets some applecarts that very badly need upsetting? Or will the truth never emerge and the killing never stop? :-( Lastly, perhaps most importantly for me, the tinyurl tip was much appreesh. However, my technique probably needs some further honing as it didn't work for me, as per examples. Will go back to the drawing board. Keep at it, you'll get there. All best Keith Regards, Bob. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Keith Addison Sent: Friday, 11 September 2009 7:21 a.m. To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
Just to add to the stew: in New Zealand (the clean, green, much-boasted nuclear-free land of absolute neutrality) a journalist was held in a mental hospital as delusional for saying that 9/11 was an inside job. http://snipurl.com/rtcnj I was wrongly diagnosed as delusional by the psychiatric staff of Ward 7 at Northland Base Hospital in Whangarei and held against my will for 11 days in mid-2006, because I maintained the attacks of 9/11 were orchestrated by criminal elements inside the US Administration. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Keith Addison Sent: Sunday, 13 September 2009 8:58 a.m. To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event Hi Bob www.examiner.com/x-18425-LA-County-Nonpartisan-Examiner~y2009m9d10-Who-are - 911-Truthers-What-is-the-911-Truth-Movement http://tinyurl.com/pvpjkv http://tinyurl.com/r2bcob Here you go: http://www.examiner.com/x-18425-LA-County-Nonpartisan-Examiner~y2009m9d10-W ho-are-911-Truthers-What-is-the-911-Truth-Movement Snipurl: http://snipurl.com/rs6y0 Tinyurl: http://tinyurl.com/q9hsep I prefer Snipurl, but they both work well. Hi Keith/Bruno et al, Your points well taken, n'less the smell seems to be growing hence the website above. Re posting big items: wasn't aware we suffered a space shortage. No space shortage, I think Bruno meant big in the sense of weighty or troublesome. Actually there is a size limit on messages, it's set at 100 kb, not very small. As for the pros and cons of the issue, the title of the thread suggested the bunfight was far from over hence my additional tuppence worth. I'm still sitting on the fence and hoping someone, somewhere will provide a definitive answer. I've yet to see it. That's right, sad to say. I doubt there'll be a breakthrough any time soon. A Mother Jones writer pointed out that this is the first 9/11 anniversary when the country is no longer being run by those who so cynically exploited horror and legitimate anger. http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2009/09/911-truth-trutherism-and-truthiness Not to presume that the current bunch are above cynically exploiting horror and legitimate anger, but a lot of the steam might go out of it with Bush-Cheney no longer in the hot seat. I'd like to see an update of the 2006 Scripps poll: Third of Americans suspect 9-11 government conspiracy, 08/01/2006 http://www.scrippsnews.com/911poll. Earlier polls put it much higher than a third - some reported that as many as 89% thought the government was lying or complicit (CNN poll, 2004). But there's less pressure now, there might not be an updated poll, and if there is one the figures could be lower. The protesters, if that's the word, have failed to build up the kind of mass movement that might have forced a serious re-examination of what happened, and it's rather unlikely that Obama will take the initiative in questioning the official version. Though I hope not, it could just wind down to a core of diehards who go on and on thumping away about thermite dust and Building 7 and Mossad and so on and everybody else takes about as much notice as they do of all the other conspiracy theories, like who killed the Kennedys (Bill Moyers just said conspiracy theories are as American as apple pie). n'less the smell seems to be growing... I think we have good news noses, you and I, and smell is the right word for this - the whole thing stinks, it did right from the start. I simply don't believe anything beyond the bald facts, that the jets hit the buildings, everything else is just murk and suspicion - the conspiracists get the murk, and everything official gets the suspicion. Meanwhile the death toll keeps mounting - 2,752 at the WTC itself, and these are the current ICH figures: Number Of Iraqis Slaughtered Since The U.S. Invaded Iraq - 1,339,771 Number of U.S. Military Personnel Sacrificed (Officially acknowledged) In America's War On Iraq: 4,661 Number Of International Occupation Force Troops Slaughtered In Afghanistan: 1,378 How many Afghans killed? And Pakistanis? Obama's ratcheting it up in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and he's NOT winding Iraq down - more private contractors (mercenaries) are being moved in than US troops are being moved out. Somehow I think a lot more people than that have died because of 9/11. Will this just go on and on happening until the real truth about 9/11 finally emerges and perhaps upsets some applecarts that very badly need upsetting? Or will the truth never emerge and the killing never stop? :-( Lastly, perhaps most importantly for me, the tinyurl tip was much appreesh. However, my technique probably needs some further honing as it didn't work for me, as per examples. Will go back to the drawing board. Keep at it, you'll get there. All best Keith Regards, Bob. -Original Message- From
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
Hi Bob www.examiner.com/x-18425-LA-County-Nonpartisan-Examiner~y2009m9d10-Who-are- 911-Truthers-What-is-the-911-Truth-Movement http://tinyurl.com/pvpjkv http://tinyurl.com/r2bcob Here you go: http://www.examiner.com/x-18425-LA-County-Nonpartisan-Examiner~y2009m9d10-Who-are-911-Truthers-What-is-the-911-Truth-Movement Snipurl: http://snipurl.com/rs6y0 Tinyurl: http://tinyurl.com/q9hsep I prefer Snipurl, but they both work well. Hi Keith/Bruno et al, Your points well taken, n'less the smell seems to be growing hence the website above. Re posting big items: wasn't aware we suffered a space shortage. No space shortage, I think Bruno meant big in the sense of weighty or troublesome. Actually there is a size limit on messages, it's set at 100 kb, not very small. As for the pros and cons of the issue, the title of the thread suggested the bunfight was far from over hence my additional tuppence worth. I'm still sitting on the fence and hoping someone, somewhere will provide a definitive answer. I've yet to see it. That's right, sad to say. I doubt there'll be a breakthrough any time soon. A Mother Jones writer pointed out that this is the first 9/11 anniversary when the country is no longer being run by those who so cynically exploited horror and legitimate anger. http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2009/09/911-truth-trutherism-and-truthiness Not to presume that the current bunch are above cynically exploiting horror and legitimate anger, but a lot of the steam might go out of it with Bush-Cheney no longer in the hot seat. I'd like to see an update of the 2006 Scripps poll: Third of Americans suspect 9-11 government conspiracy, 08/01/2006 http://www.scrippsnews.com/911poll. Earlier polls put it much higher than a third - some reported that as many as 89% thought the government was lying or complicit (CNN poll, 2004). But there's less pressure now, there might not be an updated poll, and if there is one the figures could be lower. The protesters, if that's the word, have failed to build up the kind of mass movement that might have forced a serious re-examination of what happened, and it's rather unlikely that Obama will take the initiative in questioning the official version. Though I hope not, it could just wind down to a core of diehards who go on and on thumping away about thermite dust and Building 7 and Mossad and so on and everybody else takes about as much notice as they do of all the other conspiracy theories, like who killed the Kennedys (Bill Moyers just said conspiracy theories are as American as apple pie). n'less the smell seems to be growing... I think we have good news noses, you and I, and smell is the right word for this - the whole thing stinks, it did right from the start. I simply don't believe anything beyond the bald facts, that the jets hit the buildings, everything else is just murk and suspicion - the conspiracists get the murk, and everything official gets the suspicion. Meanwhile the death toll keeps mounting - 2,752 at the WTC itself, and these are the current ICH figures: Number Of Iraqis Slaughtered Since The U.S. Invaded Iraq - 1,339,771 Number of U.S. Military Personnel Sacrificed (Officially acknowledged) In America's War On Iraq: 4,661 Number Of International Occupation Force Troops Slaughtered In Afghanistan: 1,378 How many Afghans killed? And Pakistanis? Obama's ratcheting it up in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and he's NOT winding Iraq down - more private contractors (mercenaries) are being moved in than US troops are being moved out. Somehow I think a lot more people than that have died because of 9/11. Will this just go on and on happening until the real truth about 9/11 finally emerges and perhaps upsets some applecarts that very badly need upsetting? Or will the truth never emerge and the killing never stop? :-( Lastly, perhaps most importantly for me, the tinyurl tip was much appreesh. However, my technique probably needs some further honing as it didn't work for me, as per examples. Will go back to the drawing board. Keep at it, you'll get there. All best Keith Regards, Bob. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Keith Addison Sent: Friday, 11 September 2009 7:21 a.m. To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event Hi Bruno Thankyou. And how has this something to do with biofuel or sustainability? :-) Who knows? Politics ain't sustainable, any more than business-as-usual is - call it depolitics perhaps. Best Keith Bob, Your link is still dodgy, why don't you use Tiny URL or something like it? http://tinyurl.com/ Your link ( the http:// could have been left off to start with ) www.worldarchitecturenews.com/index.php?fuseaction=wanappln.commentviewcom ment_id=158 would then look like this, (and always work on all forums and list servers): http
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
Just so I am clear; the idea is similar to the movie JFK in which corporate masters assigned poloticians to maintain a war for the purpose of making tons of war profits. Or, the movie Canadian Bacon in which USA started a war of convenience to boost the economy for re-election of a sitting president. Absurd, but real? I know corporationsown the Congress, but how far would they take it for profit's sake? I think the whole establishment is against sustainability, biofuels and just about everything else we value. Know your enemy comes to mind when I think of why this conglomeration of issues might be relevant to the discussion. On Friday, September 11, 2009, Chris Burck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: i think you hit the nail, david. i remember i called in sick that day and slept in. when i rolled out of bed and turned on the tube, saw those endlessly repeating videos plastered over fvery channel. the very first thing that crossed my mind was that suddenly the whole business in florida, dragging in the supreme court, it all made sense. there's a lot of questions that need answering, and a lot to be answered for wrt the events of that day (well, a lot of other days, too). whether the buildings went down on their own, or needed a little extra help, is kind of beside the point. [btw, my apologies if i'm repeating myself here, i thought i said the above yesterday but the comment seems to be missing from the thread. . . .] I'm not suggesting that some agency wasn't aware of what was about to happen, and they could have used it to bury records in WTC7, it's just that I'm not convinced that the two main buildings were brought down by anything other than the planes. If you think otherwise, please include the fact that the buildings fell from the point of impact into your theory. David ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
Hi Chris i think you hit the nail, david. i remember i called in sick that day and slept in. when i rolled out of bed and turned on the tube, saw those endlessly repeating videos plastered over fvery channel. the very first thing that crossed my mind was that suddenly the whole business in florida, dragging in the supreme court, it all made sense. there's a lot of questions that need answering, and a lot to be answered for wrt the events of that day (well, a lot of other days, too). whether the buildings went down on their own, or needed a little extra help, is kind of beside the point. [btw, my apologies if i'm repeating myself here, i thought i said the above yesterday but the comment seems to be missing from the thread. . . .] I read it, it's here: http://www.mail-archive.com/sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org/msg74540.html Chris Burck Wed, 09 Sep 2009 Best Keith I'm not suggesting that some agency wasn't aware of what was about to happen, and they could have used it to bury records in WTC7, it's just that I'm not convinced that the two main buildings were brought down by anything other than the planes. If you think otherwise, please include the fact that the buildings fell from the point of impact into your theory. David ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
Hi Les Just so I am clear; the idea is similar to the movie JFK in which corporate masters assigned poloticians to maintain a war for the purpose of making tons of war profits. Or, the movie Canadian Bacon in which USA started a war of convenience to boost the economy for re-election of a sitting president. Absurd, but real? I know corporationsown the Congress, but how far would they take it for profit's sake? More than just Congress I think. It might be more economical to ask what would they stop at? I think the whole establishment is against sustainability, biofuels and just about everything else we value. Know your enemy comes to mind when I think of why this conglomeration of issues might be relevant to the discussion. Well put, thankyou. All best Keith On Friday, September 11, 2009, Chris Burck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: i think you hit the nail, david. i remember i called in sick that day and slept in. when i rolled out of bed and turned on the tube, saw those endlessly repeating videos plastered over fvery channel. the very first thing that crossed my mind was that suddenly the whole business in florida, dragging in the supreme court, it all made sense. there's a lot of questions that need answering, and a lot to be answered for wrt the events of that day (well, a lot of other days, too). whether the buildings went down on their own, or needed a little extra help, is kind of beside the point. [btw, my apologies if i'm repeating myself here, i thought i said the above yesterday but the comment seems to be missing from the thread. . . .] I'm not suggesting that some agency wasn't aware of what was about to happen, and they could have used it to bury records in WTC7, it's just that I'm not convinced that the two main buildings were brought down by anything other than the planes. If you think otherwise, please include the fact that the buildings fell from the point of impact into your theory. David ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
Hi All ; Here is link to the official lab report from Netherlands which found super thermite in WTC dust. Free download. Anyone technical will appreciate the attention to detail and thoroughness of this report. It certainly raises some disturbing questions. http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/content.php?TOCPJ/2009/0002/0001/7TOCPJ.SGM BR Peter G. Thailand www.gac-seeds.com --- On Fri, 9/11/09, Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Date: Friday, September 11, 2009, 12:56 PM Hi Chris i think you hit the nail, david. i remember i called in sick that day and slept in. when i rolled out of bed and turned on the tube, saw those endlessly repeating videos plastered over fvery channel. the very first thing that crossed my mind was that suddenly the whole business in florida, dragging in the supreme court, it all made sense. there's a lot of questions that need answering, and a lot to be answered for wrt the events of that day (well, a lot of other days, too). whether the buildings went down on their own, or needed a little extra help, is kind of beside the point. [btw, my apologies if i'm repeating myself here, i thought i said the above yesterday but the comment seems to be missing from the thread. . . .] I read it, it's here: http://www.mail-archive.com/sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org/msg74540.html Chris Burck Wed, 09 Sep 2009 Best Keith I'm not suggesting that some agency wasn't aware of what was about to happen, and they could have used it to bury records in WTC7, it's just that I'm not convinced that the two main buildings were brought down by anything other than the planes. If you think otherwise, please include the fact that the buildings fell from the point of impact into your theory. David ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
why didnt they say what rhe red non ironoxide stuff is Thermite is iron oxide and aluminum flakes. when hot enough it snags the oxygen from the iron oxde forming aluminum oxide and molten iron. simple stuff really --- On Fri, 9/11/09, Guag Meister [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Guag Meister [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Date: Friday, September 11, 2009, 7:44 PM Hi All ; Here is link to the official lab report from Netherlands which found super thermite in WTC dust. Free download. Anyone technical will appreciate the attention to detail and thoroughness of this report. It certainly raises some disturbing questions. http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/content.php?TOCPJ/2009/0002/0001/7TOCPJ.SGM BR Peter G. Thailand www.gac-seeds.com --- On Fri, 9/11/09, Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Date: Friday, September 11, 2009, 12:56 PM Hi Chris i think you hit the nail, david. i remember i called in sick that day and slept in. when i rolled out of bed and turned on the tube, saw those endlessly repeating videos plastered over fvery channel. the very first thing that crossed my mind was that suddenly the whole business in florida, dragging in the supreme court, it all made sense. there's a lot of questions that need answering, and a lot to be answered for wrt the events of that day (well, a lot of other days, too). whether the buildings went down on their own, or needed a little extra help, is kind of beside the point. [btw, my apologies if i'm repeating myself here, i thought i said the above yesterday but the comment seems to be missing from the thread. . . .] I read it, it's here: http://www.mail-archive.com/sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org/msg74540.html Chris Burck Wed, 09 Sep 2009 Best Keith I'm not suggesting that some agency wasn't aware of what was about to happen, and they could have used it to bury records in WTC7, it's just that I'm not convinced that the two main buildings were brought down by anything other than the planes. If you think otherwise, please include the fact that the buildings fell from the point of impact into your theory. David ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090911/3f630a66/attachment.html ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
Hi Bob Hey guys, Conspiracy/schmiracy, let's have a heresy. Here is what the architects have to say on the 9/11 lurk. Some of them. Some big jets flew into some big buildings in the US and lots of people were killed, and beyond that? Murk. Heresy? - ie, the official view is just dogma? I don't think much of the official view either, but the opposing camp isn't short of its brand of dogma. Heresy schmeresy. Another smoking gun? :-) Best Keith Link: http://www.worldarchitecturenews.com/index.php?fuseaction=wanappln.commentvi ew http://www.worldarchitecturenews.com/index.php?fuseaction=wanappln.commentv iewcomment_id=158 comment_id=158 (via shareaholic) ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
Hi Bruno Thankyou. And how has this something to do with biofuel or sustainability? :-) Who knows? Politics ain't sustainable, any more than business-as-usual is - call it depolitics perhaps. Best Keith Bob, Your link is still dodgy, why don't you use Tiny URL or something like it? http://tinyurl.com/ Your link ( the http:// could have been left off to start with ) www.worldarchitecturenews.com/index.php?fuseaction=wanappln.commentviewcomment_id=158 would then look like this, (and always work on all forums and list servers): http://tinyurl.com/la7x98 but if you like it, it may look like this : http://tinyurl.com/bobs-9-11-conspiracy-theory And imho it is always useful if you push such big items into a discussion group, even if you truly believe the conspiracy theory, you may simple check first what skeptical debunkers of the same subject have to say; It may prepare you fore what opposite comments will come up; or even make yourself think, really think, and you may decide to not forward crap to a group were you're known, and keep your reputation in good shape. ;-) E.G: http://www.debunking911.com/ http://www.jod911.com/ ... As you'll see they have covered almost all angles, and with allot more then 'believes' and 'assumptions'. And how has this something to do with biofuel or sustainability? Grts Bruno M. ~~ At 00:30 10/09/2009, From: bmolloy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Keith, The link on my last post was dodgy. This one works better http://www.worldarchitecturenews.com/index.php?fuseaction=wanappln.commentv iewcomment_id=158 If not, the full article is available below. As for facts: The discovery of nano-thermite in the WTC dust was published in The Open Chemical Physics Journal in April 2009. Regards, Bob. CONSPIRACY THEORY OR HIDDEN TRUTH? THE 9/11 ENIGMAS... Richard Gage, AIA, Gregg Roberts, and David Chandler Richard Gage, AIA has been a practicing San Francisco Bay Area architect for more than 20 years, and is a registered member of the American Institute of Architects. Most recently he worked on a $400M mixed-use facility in Las Vegas NV. But he is also the founder and CEO of Architects Engineers for 9/11 Truth, now numbering over 800 A/Eís, calling for a new investigation into the destruction of all 3 WTC high-rises on 9/11. Gage has spoken at over 100 events, reaching 20 U.S. states and 8 countries. He has been invited to present in 14 cities Australia, New Zealand, and Japan before the end of this year. As the anniversary of the events approaches, Gage tells WAN why he thinks there are hidden depths to the destruction of the World Trade Centre... .. CUT.. If it doesn't start off with the preferred conclusion-of-choice and then go in search of the facts to prove it, but instead simply goes in search of facts, along with all the patient and careful cross-checking that takes, and then emerges with a fact-based conclusion that checks out, or even with just some hard facts without a conclusion well then, that's different. But AFAIK it hasn't happened yet, and don't hold yer breath. Best Keith == ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
) causes a much faster reaction so it can be used as a high explosive. The discovery of nano-thermite in the WTC dust was published in The Open Chemical Physics Journal in April 2009. Hundreds of Red/Grey chips of Unignited thermite in every WTC Dust sample Nano-thermite particle sizes are 1,000 times smaller than a human hair. This material is not made in a cave in Afghanistan. These scientists found not just a smoking gun, but a loaded gun. Independent lines of evidence prove the official government claims are impossible. We see our role at AE911Truth as exposing the evidence official agencies and the corporate media are covering up. Following up on the implications is the responsibility of every citizen. Every citizen must face his or her own conscience when confronting these difficult facts -- especially when we consider that 9/11 is the foundation for two wars, the launching of an endless war on terror, and the loss of our freedoms due to legislation pushed through amid the fog of war. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kirk McLoren Sent: Thursday, 10 September 2009 6:16 a.m. To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event It proves explosives were in the building which isnt easy to do like parking a vehicle in the street. Federal buildings have security. The conspirators deny as a matter of policy. Nixon was the mile marker in that league. Anyone familiar with explosives can attest to that. It really is simple Push on something - where does it go? When an explosive turns into a gas it creates a high pressure area and applies force to whatever obstructs it. That force is outward from the center. The gvt story would have us believe rubble flew 180 degrees from the thrust, ie into the thrust. impossible. --- On Wed, 9/9/09, Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Date: Wednesday, September 9, 2009, 8:08 AM Got any facts rather than just claims and opinions and assertions? I mean, got any that someone like me will accept as facts? Sure. Anyone who has ever seen the results of an explosion knows that the official story is fantasy. Photographs show rubble from the building thrown across the street, past where the truck was parked. There would be no rubble there if the only blast was the truck. Blast from the truck would send rubble away from the truck and yet we find it on the side away from the building. Explosives are required to be in the building to send rubble in the other direction. Simple physics. And the other side? What does the opposite camp say? Or do all agree that those are simple facts of simple physics? Obviously not, eh, or it wouldn't be a controversy, if it's really a controversy rather than just fringe stuff. Anyway, does the opposition agree it's just simple physics? Say they do. The following question would be, and so? What does it prove? What's the favoured conclusion (both sides - or all sides, I guess there's more than two)? Keith Kirk The eyes see what the mind knows --- On Tue, 9/8/09, Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Date: Tuesday, September 8, 2009, 8:52 AM No, he is outside the expectation of a military officer. Just too free a spirit perhaps. More like a deluded one perhaps, or a somewhat deranged one perhaps. Let's put it this way: it's sheer BS, it shouldn't even have been posted. Who else retired would step up to the plate No need to put it quite so nobly. Step up with what, is the question. Stepping up with fact-free conspiracisms and perhaps not being very honest about it isn't a contribution to anything other than confusion. - well maybe Benton K. Partin Brigadier Gen. USAF (Ret.) 8908 Captains Row Alexandria, Virginia 22308 703-780-7652. http://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/OK/PARTIN/okm.htmhttp://wh atreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/OK/PARTIN/okm.htm oklahoma bombing My word, Kirk, you will have your conspiracies won't you. Got any facts rather than just claims and opinions and assertions? I mean, got any that someone like me will accept as facts? The list itself is the same, it has a long and honorable tradition of being rigorous, as you know. We're quite happy to explore possibilities or we wouldn't have achieved what we have, but sheer conjecture dressed up as fact isn't included. Partin was a research scientist - invented the continuous rod warhead. very qualified guy. Made bombs, nice. Couldn't we have done without more and better bombs? Best Keith Kirk The eyes see what the mind knows --- On Tue, 9/8/09
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
Over 100 steel framed buildings have suffered major fires, many much worse, yet none have collapsed. All three buildings on 9/11 fell through what should have been the path of greatest resistance ? thousands of tons of steel ? resulting in total dismemberment. This would require precisely timed removal of critical columns, which office fires cannot accomplish.Well, you omit to mention that the two main buildings were also hit by planes, at different heights, and that the one hit later, lower, fell first. Both fell from the point of impact of the planes. Now, I'm no expert, but I'd guess that this means the height of the plane impacts had something to do with the structural damage and the stress on the buildings, and the relative weight above meant that the one that hit lower fell first. Of course, the experts behind this could have arranged this all, and ensured that the planes hit the right point where the explosives were to go off, or it could have been holograms... I'm not suggesting that some agency wasn't aware of what was about to happen, and they could have used it to bury records in WTC7, it's just that I'm not convinced that the two main buildings were brought down by anything other than the planes. If you think otherwise, please include the fact that the buildings fell from the point of impact into your theory. David _ Drag n’ drop—Get easy photo sharing with Windows Live™ Photos. http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowslive/products/photos.aspx -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090910/b55238bd/attachment.html ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
i think you hit the nail, david. i remember i called in sick that day and slept in. when i rolled out of bed and turned on the tube, saw those endlessly repeating videos plastered over fvery channel. the very first thing that crossed my mind was that suddenly the whole business in florida, dragging in the supreme court, it all made sense. there's a lot of questions that need answering, and a lot to be answered for wrt the events of that day (well, a lot of other days, too). whether the buildings went down on their own, or needed a little extra help, is kind of beside the point. [btw, my apologies if i'm repeating myself here, i thought i said the above yesterday but the comment seems to be missing from the thread. . . .] I'm not suggesting that some agency wasn't aware of what was about to happen, and they could have used it to bury records in WTC7, it's just that I'm not convinced that the two main buildings were brought down by anything other than the planes. If you think otherwise, please include the fact that the buildings fell from the point of impact into your theory. David ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
www.examiner.com/x-18425-LA-County-Nonpartisan-Examiner~y2009m9d10-Who-are- 911-Truthers-What-is-the-911-Truth-Movement http://tinyurl.com/pvpjkv http://tinyurl.com/r2bcob Hi Keith/Bruno et al, Your points well taken, n'less the smell seems to be growing hence the website above. Re posting big items: wasn't aware we suffered a space shortage. As for the pros and cons of the issue, the title of the thread suggested the bunfight was far from over hence my additional tuppence worth. I'm still sitting on the fence and hoping someone, somewhere will provide a definitive answer. I've yet to see it. Lastly, perhaps most importantly for me, the tinyurl tip was much appreesh. However, my technique probably needs some further honing as it didn't work for me, as per examples. Will go back to the drawing board. Regards, Bob. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Keith Addison Sent: Friday, 11 September 2009 7:21 a.m. To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event Hi Bruno Thankyou. And how has this something to do with biofuel or sustainability? :-) Who knows? Politics ain't sustainable, any more than business-as-usual is - call it depolitics perhaps. Best Keith Bob, Your link is still dodgy, why don't you use Tiny URL or something like it? http://tinyurl.com/ Your link ( the http:// could have been left off to start with ) www.worldarchitecturenews.com/index.php?fuseaction=wanappln.commentviewcom ment_id=158 would then look like this, (and always work on all forums and list servers): http://tinyurl.com/la7x98 but if you like it, it may look like this : http://tinyurl.com/bobs-9-11-conspiracy-theory And imho it is always useful if you push such big items into a discussion group, even if you truly believe the conspiracy theory, you may simple check first what skeptical debunkers of the same subject have to say; It may prepare you fore what opposite comments will come up; or even make yourself think, really think, and you may decide to not forward crap to a group were you're known, and keep your reputation in good shape. ;-) E.G: http://www.debunking911.com/ http://www.jod911.com/ ... As you'll see they have covered almost all angles, and with allot more then 'believes' and 'assumptions'. And how has this something to do with biofuel or sustainability? Grts Bruno M. ~~ At 00:30 10/09/2009, From: bmolloy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Keith, The link on my last post was dodgy. This one works better http://www.worldarchitecturenews.com/index.php?fuseaction=wanappln.commen tv iewcomment_id=158 If not, the full article is available below. As for facts: The discovery of nano-thermite in the WTC dust was published in The Open Chemical Physics Journal in April 2009. Regards, Bob. CONSPIRACY THEORY OR HIDDEN TRUTH? THE 9/11 ENIGMAS... Richard Gage, AIA, Gregg Roberts, and David Chandler Richard Gage, AIA has been a practicing San Francisco Bay Area architect for more than 20 years, and is a registered member of the American Institute of Architects. Most recently he worked on a $400M mixed-use facility in Las Vegas NV. But he is also the founder and CEO of Architects Engineers for 9/11 Truth, now numbering over 800 A/Eís, calling for a new investigation into the destruction of all 3 WTC high-rises on 9/11. Gage has spoken at over 100 events, reaching 20 U.S. states and 8 countries. He has been invited to present in 14 cities Australia, New Zealand, and Japan before the end of this year. As the anniversary of the events approaches, Gage tells WAN why he thinks there are hidden depths to the destruction of the World Trade Centre... .. CUT.. If it doesn't start off with the preferred conclusion-of-choice and then go in search of the facts to prove it, but instead simply goes in search of facts, along with all the patient and careful cross-checking that takes, and then emerges with a fact-based conclusion that checks out, or even with just some hard facts without a conclusion well then, that's different. But AFAIK it hasn't happened yet, and don't hold yer breath. Best Keith == ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
If you wanted to cut a beam you wouldnt use dust - the reaction would be too rapid. You would use something about as coarse as ground coffee. Chemists call it the Goldschmidt process after the inventor. I think the first samples of tungsten were made this way. Kirk --- On Thu, 9/10/09, Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Date: Thursday, September 10, 2009, 12:20 PM Hi Bob Keith, The link on my last post was dodgy. This one works better http://www.worldarchitecturenews.com/index.php?fuseaction=wanappln.commentv iewcomment_id=158 If not, the full article is available below. As for facts: The discovery of nano-thermite in the WTC dust was published in The Open Chemical Physics Journal in April 2009. How big is nano-thermite dust? Microns, micrograms, or smaller than that? Found amid about 500,000 tons of rubble, that included more than 2,500 toxic contaminants and so on. Well, maybe. But, um, wouldn't it have exploded? As I understand it (not very well) nano-thermite totally explodes, that's the point of it - down to atomic-level proximities. Hm, I was talking of pixie dust only a few posts back, and now we have it, pixie dust, only it didn't explode somehow. By the way, the editor of the Open Chemical Physics Journal resigned over the publication of the nano-thermite article. Actually it's just an online journal. Also by the way, some or most of the authors aren't just scientists who just happened along out of pure scientific interest, they have a history of 9/11 conspiracy theory activism. Some have since lost their jobs, which I suppose could mean that they weren't as disinterested as they should have been, or, of course, that TPTB were out to silence them (after the horses had fled). All best Keith Regards, Bob. CONSPIRACY THEORY OR HIDDEN TRUTH? THE 9/11 ENIGMAS... Richard Gage, AIA, Gregg Roberts, and David Chandler Richard Gage, AIA has been a practicing San Francisco Bay Area architect for more than 20 years, and is a registered member of the American Institute of Architects. Most recently he worked on a $400M mixed-use facility in Las Vegas NV. But he is also the founder and CEO of Architects Engineers for 9/11 Truth, now numbering over 800 A/E’s, calling for a new investigation into the destruction of all 3 WTC high-rises on 9/11. Gage has spoken at over 100 events, reaching 20 U.S. states and 8 countries. He has been invited to present in 14 cities Australia, New Zealand, and Japan before the end of this year. As the anniversary of the events approaches, Gage tells WAN why he thinks there are hidden depths to the destruction of the World Trade Centre... In all likelihood, you are unaware of the most important facts involving the destructions of the World Trade Center buildings. Nearly all the mainstream information sources and government officials have kept crucial information hidden from the public. This brief article will provide a clear explanation as to what actually happened to the Twin Towers and Building 7 (WTC 7) on September 11, 2001. Architects Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911Truth) is a non-partisan, non-profit organization now numbering over 800 technical professionals and thousands of other supporters dedicated to exposing the facts that point to the explosive destruction of all three World Trade Center (WTC) high-rises.. We are calling for a new independent investigation empowered to subpoena and question witnesses under oath. Well-documented facts prove the WTC high-rises were destroyed by explosives. The implications are grave, but we ask that you look at the facts. AE911Truth is also concerned that evidence has been distorted and covered up by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the federal agency assigned to investigate the building collapses. World Trade Center – Building 7 47-storey WTC 7 before destruction WTC 7 was a 47-story steel-framed high-rise 100 yards from the North Tower.. Even though no airplane hit it, it collapsed rapidly and totally on 9/11, in the manner of a controlled demolition. Despite its suspicious collapse, the 9/11 Commission report does not even mention WTC 7. NIST left its analysis of the WTC 7 collapse until 2008, seven years after the events, long after all the rubble was destroyed. NIST claims WTC 7 collapsed due to “normal office fires” which created a “new phenomenon” in high-rise catastrophes: collapse caused by thermal expansion of beams. NIST claims this caused the failure of a single column – the rest just followed. Free-fall acceleration through 40,000 tons of structural steel? NIST Forced to Acknowledge Free-Fall of WTC 7 In August 2008, NIST released the draft of its final report on Building 7. In that draft NIST claims that the building took 40% longer than free-fall time to collapse the first
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
Got any facts rather than just claims and opinions and assertions? I mean, got any that someone like me will accept as facts? Sure. Anyone who has ever seen the results of an explosion knows that the official story is fantasy. Photographs show rubble from the building thrown across the street, past where the truck was parked. There would be no rubble there if the only blast was the truck. Blast from the truck would send rubble away from the truck and yet we find it on the side away from the building. Explosives are required to be in the building to send rubble in the other direction. Simple physics. Kirk The eyes see what the mind knows --- On Tue, 9/8/09, Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Date: Tuesday, September 8, 2009, 8:52 AM No, he is outside the expectation of a military officer. Just too free a spirit perhaps. More like a deluded one perhaps, or a somewhat deranged one perhaps. Let's put it this way: it's sheer BS, it shouldn't even have been posted. Who else retired would step up to the plate No need to put it quite so nobly. Step up with what, is the question. Stepping up with fact-free conspiracisms and perhaps not being very honest about it isn't a contribution to anything other than confusion. - well maybe Benton K. Partin Brigadier Gen. USAF (Ret.) 8908 Captains Row Alexandria, Virginia 22308 703-780-7652. http://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/OK/PARTIN/okm.htm oklahoma bombing My word, Kirk, you will have your conspiracies won't you. Got any facts rather than just claims and opinions and assertions? I mean, got any that someone like me will accept as facts? The list itself is the same, it has a long and honorable tradition of being rigorous, as you know. We're quite happy to explore possibilities or we wouldn't have achieved what we have, but sheer conjecture dressed up as fact isn't included. Partin was a research scientist - invented the continuous rod warhead. very qualified guy. Made bombs, nice. Couldn't we have done without more and better bombs? Best Keith Kirk The eyes see what the mind knows --- On Tue, 9/8/09, Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Date: Tuesday, September 8, 2009, 3:11 AM The stargate project was spook remote viewing. Does spook mean spy or ghost, in this context? Stargate was devoted to **psychic** remote viewing, the purported ability to psychically 'see' events, sites, or information from a great distance. Bit superfluous to say it wasn't exactly successful. Echelon works at least, on the other hand, for instance, as opposed to pixie dust. CIA put effort into it. I know, but I don't think that gives it much cred. The Soviets tried it too, that's why the US tried it. It achieved nothing. Not as woo woo as you might think. Totally woo woo, IMHO, just as I thought. Sure, maybe some people are psychic or clairvoyant or even telepathic, maybe everybody is, or could be, maybe that's how the whole biosphere really works, who knows, but trying to use clairvoyance as a reliable technique for intelligence gathering or to support conspiracy theories is ludicrous. Wikipedia will do, very easy, no need to go any further: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stargate_Project Anyway, is this to suggest that a wacko like long-retired ex-Major General Stubblebine has some credibility with his 9/11 conspiracy theories, or with anything else? Because of Stargate? Stubblebine was forced to retire in 1984 and was replaced because of his obsession with the paranormal. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stargate_Project#Major_General_Albert_Stubblebine Not very surprising - The primary mission of military intelligence in the United States Army is to provide timely, relevant, accurate, and synchronized intelligence and electronic warfare support to tactical, operational and strategic-level commanders. Not a trivial matter. If you were a field commander would you want someone like Stubblebine doing that job for you? How do you explain the deception in the YouTube title? The headline says: U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event. ... Ah, so he WAS a major general once, and indeed head of army intelligence, but he retired **25 years ago**. Not quite the same thing eh. ... Why the misleading headline? Not deliberate? Hey, Kirk, do some checking first, will you, please? Best Keith Kirk The eyes see what the mind knows --- On Mon, 9/7/09, Douglas Woodard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Douglas Woodard [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
Got any facts rather than just claims and opinions and assertions? I mean, got any that someone like me will accept as facts? Sure. Anyone who has ever seen the results of an explosion knows that the official story is fantasy. Photographs show rubble from the building thrown across the street, past where the truck was parked. There would be no rubble there if the only blast was the truck. Blast from the truck would send rubble away from the truck and yet we find it on the side away from the building. Explosives are required to be in the building to send rubble in the other direction. Simple physics. And the other side? What does the opposite camp say? Or do all agree that those are simple facts of simple physics? Obviously not, eh, or it wouldn't be a controversy, if it's really a controversy rather than just fringe stuff. Anyway, does the opposition agree it's just simple physics? Say they do. The following question would be, and so? What does it prove? What's the favoured conclusion (both sides - or all sides, I guess there's more than two)? Keith Kirk The eyes see what the mind knows --- On Tue, 9/8/09, Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Date: Tuesday, September 8, 2009, 8:52 AM No, he is outside the expectation of a military officer. Just too free a spirit perhaps. More like a deluded one perhaps, or a somewhat deranged one perhaps. Let's put it this way: it's sheer BS, it shouldn't even have been posted. Who else retired would step up to the plate No need to put it quite so nobly. Step up with what, is the question. Stepping up with fact-free conspiracisms and perhaps not being very honest about it isn't a contribution to anything other than confusion. - well maybe Benton K. Partin Brigadier Gen. USAF (Ret.) 8908 Captains Row Alexandria, Virginia 22308 703-780-7652. http://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/OK/PARTIN/okm.htmhttp://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/OK/PARTIN/okm.htm oklahoma bombing My word, Kirk, you will have your conspiracies won't you. Got any facts rather than just claims and opinions and assertions? I mean, got any that someone like me will accept as facts? The list itself is the same, it has a long and honorable tradition of being rigorous, as you know. We're quite happy to explore possibilities or we wouldn't have achieved what we have, but sheer conjecture dressed up as fact isn't included. Partin was a research scientist - invented the continuous rod warhead. very qualified guy. Made bombs, nice. Couldn't we have done without more and better bombs? Best Keith Kirk The eyes see what the mind knows --- On Tue, 9/8/09, Keith Addison /mc/[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Keith Addison /mc/[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event To: /mc/[EMAIL PROTECTED]biofuel@sustainablelists.org Date: Tuesday, September 8, 2009, 3:11 AM The stargate project was spook remote viewing. Does spook mean spy or ghost, in this context? Stargate was devoted to **psychic** remote viewing, the purported ability to psychically 'see' events, sites, or information from a great distance. Bit superfluous to say it wasn't exactly successful. Echelon works at least, on the other hand, for instance, as opposed to pixie dust. CIA put effort into it. I know, but I don't think that gives it much cred. The Soviets tried it too, that's why the US tried it. It achieved nothing. Not as woo woo as you might think. Totally woo woo, IMHO, just as I thought. Sure, maybe some people are psychic or clairvoyant or even telepathic, maybe everybody is, or could be, maybe that's how the whole biosphere really works, who knows, but trying to use clairvoyance as a reliable technique for intelligence gathering or to support conspiracy theories is ludicrous. Wikipedia will do, very easy, no need to go any further: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stargate_Projecthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stargate_Project Anyway, is this to suggest that a wacko like long-retired ex-Major General Stubblebine has some credibility with his 9/11 conspiracy theories, or with anything else? Because of Stargate? Stubblebine was forced to retire in 1984 and was replaced because of his obsession with the paranormal. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stargate_Project#Major_General_Albert_Stubblebinehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stargate_Project#Major_General_Albert_Stubblebine Not very surprising - The primary mission of military intelligence in the United States Army is to provide timely, relevant, accurate, and synchronized intelligence and electronic warfare support to tactical, operational and strategic-level commanders. Not a trivial matter. If you were a field commander would you want someone like
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
It proves explosives were in the building which isnt easy to do like parking a vehicle in the street. Federal buildings have security. The conspirators deny as a matter of policy. Nixon was the mile marker in that league. Anyone familiar with explosives can attest to that. It really is simple Push on something - where does it go? When an explosive turns into a gas it creates a high pressure area and applies force to whatever obstructs it. That force is outward from the center. The gvt story would have us believe rubble flew 180 degrees from the thrust, ie into the thrust. impossible. --- On Wed, 9/9/09, Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Date: Wednesday, September 9, 2009, 8:08 AM Got any facts rather than just claims and opinions and assertions? I mean, got any that someone like me will accept as facts? Sure. Anyone who has ever seen the results of an explosion knows that the official story is fantasy. Photographs show rubble from the building thrown across the street, past where the truck was parked. There would be no rubble there if the only blast was the truck. Blast from the truck would send rubble away from the truck and yet we find it on the side away from the building. Explosives are required to be in the building to send rubble in the other direction. Simple physics. And the other side? What does the opposite camp say? Or do all agree that those are simple facts of simple physics? Obviously not, eh, or it wouldn't be a controversy, if it's really a controversy rather than just fringe stuff. Anyway, does the opposition agree it's just simple physics? Say they do. The following question would be, and so? What does it prove? What's the favoured conclusion (both sides - or all sides, I guess there's more than two)? Keith Kirk The eyes see what the mind knows --- On Tue, 9/8/09, Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Date: Tuesday, September 8, 2009, 8:52 AM No, he is outside the expectation of a military officer. Just too free a spirit perhaps. More like a deluded one perhaps, or a somewhat deranged one perhaps. Let's put it this way: it's sheer BS, it shouldn't even have been posted. Who else retired would step up to the plate No need to put it quite so nobly. Step up with what, is the question. Stepping up with fact-free conspiracisms and perhaps not being very honest about it isn't a contribution to anything other than confusion. - well maybe Benton K. Partin Brigadier Gen. USAF (Ret.) 8908 Captains Row Alexandria, Virginia 22308 703-780-7652. http://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/OK/PARTIN/okm.htmhttp://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/OK/PARTIN/okm.htm oklahoma bombing My word, Kirk, you will have your conspiracies won't you. Got any facts rather than just claims and opinions and assertions? I mean, got any that someone like me will accept as facts? The list itself is the same, it has a long and honorable tradition of being rigorous, as you know. We're quite happy to explore possibilities or we wouldn't have achieved what we have, but sheer conjecture dressed up as fact isn't included. Partin was a research scientist - invented the continuous rod warhead. very qualified guy. Made bombs, nice. Couldn't we have done without more and better bombs? Best Keith Kirk The eyes see what the mind knows --- On Tue, 9/8/09, Keith Addison /mc/[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Keith Addison /mc/[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event To: /mc/[EMAIL PROTECTED]biofuel@sustainablelists.org Date: Tuesday, September 8, 2009, 3:11 AM The stargate project was spook remote viewing. Does spook mean spy or ghost, in this context? Stargate was devoted to **psychic** remote viewing, the purported ability to psychically 'see' events, sites, or information from a great distance. Bit superfluous to say it wasn't exactly successful. Echelon works at least, on the other hand, for instance, as opposed to pixie dust. CIA put effort into it. I know, but I don't think that gives it much cred. The Soviets tried it too, that's why the US tried it. It achieved nothing. Not as woo woo as you might think. Totally woo woo, IMHO, just as I thought. Sure, maybe some people are psychic or clairvoyant or even telepathic, maybe everybody is, or could be, maybe that's how the whole biosphere really works, who knows, but trying to use clairvoyance as a reliable technique for intelligence gathering or to support conspiracy theories is ludicrous. Wikipedia will do, very easy, no need to go any further: http
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
It proves explosives were in the building which isnt easy to do like parking a vehicle in the street. Federal buildings have security. The conspirators deny as a matter of policy. Of course they do, otherwise they wouldn't be conspirators, they'd be culprits by their own admission, and conspiracists would have no theories. Or maybe they'd have them anyway. Yes, I think they'd have them anyway. Only two sides? Who exactly are the conspirators, according to all this? The federal government? Or just a janitor or someone who let the bomb carrier in through the side entrance while the guard was taking a leak? Or does it get more exotic than that? Any motive? And McVeigh? Villain? Victim? Scapegoat? Hero? Nixon was the mile marker in that league. That was before Oklahoma, why mention it now? There's been much worse top-level denial since Nixon, and he sure wasn't the first. Anyone familiar with explosives can attest to that. How many people in the US would that be do you think? A lot of folks, eh? And what proportion of them would you say actually do attest to that, in this case? Is it the majority view among them? If not why not? And if it is the majority view among explosives experts, how would you explain it that the official denial by the alleged conspirators stands unchallenged? Because I think it does, AFAIK there's been no challenge serious enough to require a serious response. Only on the fringe. It really is simple I don't think so, such scenes are chaotic, seldom simple. This matter of rubble on the wrong side of the street is the lynchpin of the conspiracy case? Push on something - where does it go? :-) Now where's that old Firesign tape... meanwhile, IIRC... And with my quivering quill I convey it to you thus: If you push something hard enough it will fall over. ROFL! In the beginning there were hot lumps. When an explosive turns into a gas it creates a high pressure area and applies force to whatever obstructs it. That force is outward from the center. The gvt story would have us believe rubble flew 180 degrees from the thrust, ie into the thrust. impossible. Perhaps, if that's all there is to it, but I doubt that. Have you examined the government story as closely as you seem to have examined the bouncing rubble theory? Have you seen anything akin to a truly objective critique of the two sides to the case that you could point us to (if they can really be described as two sides)? What exactly are you trying to demonstrate? IMHO it would have been more surprising if there hadn't been fringe accusations of a government cover-up, substance or not. Why not the anthrax letters rather, don't you think there's more mileage in that? Keith --- On Wed, 9/9/09, Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Date: Wednesday, September 9, 2009, 8:08 AM Got any facts rather than just claims and opinions and assertions? I mean, got any that someone like me will accept as facts? Sure. Anyone who has ever seen the results of an explosion knows that the official story is fantasy. Photographs show rubble from the building thrown across the street, past where the truck was parked. There would be no rubble there if the only blast was the truck. Blast from the truck would send rubble away from the truck and yet we find it on the side away from the building. Explosives are required to be in the building to send rubble in the other direction. Simple physics. And the other side? What does the opposite camp say? Or do all agree that those are simple facts of simple physics? Obviously not, eh, or it wouldn't be a controversy, if it's really a controversy rather than just fringe stuff. Anyway, does the opposition agree it's just simple physics? Say they do. The following question would be, and so? What does it prove? What's the favoured conclusion (both sides - or all sides, I guess there's more than two)? Keith Kirk The eyes see what the mind knows --- On Tue, 9/8/09, Keith Addison /mc/[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Keith Addison /mc/[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event To: /mc/[EMAIL PROTECTED]biofuel@sustainablelists.org Date: Tuesday, September 8, 2009, 8:52 AM No, he is outside the expectation of a military officer. Just too free a spirit perhaps. More like a deluded one perhaps, or a somewhat deranged one perhaps. Let's put it this way: it's sheer BS, it shouldn't even have been posted. Who else retired would step up to the plate No need to put it quite so nobly. Step up with what, is the question. Stepping up with fact-free conspiracisms and perhaps not being very honest about it isn't a contribution to anything other than confusion. - well maybe Benton K. Partin
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
the fog of war. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kirk McLoren Sent: Thursday, 10 September 2009 6:16 a.m. To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event It proves explosives were in the building which isnt easy to do like parking a vehicle in the street. Federal buildings have security. The conspirators deny as a matter of policy. Nixon was the mile marker in that league. Anyone familiar with explosives can attest to that. It really is simple Push on something - where does it go? When an explosive turns into a gas it creates a high pressure area and applies force to whatever obstructs it. That force is outward from the center. The gvt story would have us believe rubble flew 180 degrees from the thrust, ie into the thrust. impossible. --- On Wed, 9/9/09, Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Date: Wednesday, September 9, 2009, 8:08 AM Got any facts rather than just claims and opinions and assertions? I mean, got any that someone like me will accept as facts? Sure. Anyone who has ever seen the results of an explosion knows that the official story is fantasy. Photographs show rubble from the building thrown across the street, past where the truck was parked. There would be no rubble there if the only blast was the truck. Blast from the truck would send rubble away from the truck and yet we find it on the side away from the building. Explosives are required to be in the building to send rubble in the other direction. Simple physics. And the other side? What does the opposite camp say? Or do all agree that those are simple facts of simple physics? Obviously not, eh, or it wouldn't be a controversy, if it's really a controversy rather than just fringe stuff. Anyway, does the opposition agree it's just simple physics? Say they do. The following question would be, and so? What does it prove? What's the favoured conclusion (both sides - or all sides, I guess there's more than two)? Keith Kirk The eyes see what the mind knows --- On Tue, 9/8/09, Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Date: Tuesday, September 8, 2009, 8:52 AM No, he is outside the expectation of a military officer. Just too free a spirit perhaps. More like a deluded one perhaps, or a somewhat deranged one perhaps. Let's put it this way: it's sheer BS, it shouldn't even have been posted. Who else retired would step up to the plate No need to put it quite so nobly. Step up with what, is the question. Stepping up with fact-free conspiracisms and perhaps not being very honest about it isn't a contribution to anything other than confusion. - well maybe Benton K. Partin Brigadier Gen. USAF (Ret.) 8908 Captains Row Alexandria, Virginia 22308 703-780-7652. http://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/OK/PARTIN/okm.htmhttp://wh atreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/OK/PARTIN/okm.htm oklahoma bombing My word, Kirk, you will have your conspiracies won't you. Got any facts rather than just claims and opinions and assertions? I mean, got any that someone like me will accept as facts? The list itself is the same, it has a long and honorable tradition of being rigorous, as you know. We're quite happy to explore possibilities or we wouldn't have achieved what we have, but sheer conjecture dressed up as fact isn't included. Partin was a research scientist - invented the continuous rod warhead. very qualified guy. Made bombs, nice. Couldn't we have done without more and better bombs? Best Keith Kirk The eyes see what the mind knows --- On Tue, 9/8/09, Keith Addison /mc/[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Keith Addison /mc/[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event To: /mc/[EMAIL PROTECTED]biofuel@sustainablelists.org Date: Tuesday, September 8, 2009, 3:11 AM The stargate project was spook remote viewing. Does spook mean spy or ghost, in this context? Stargate was devoted to **psychic** remote viewing, the purported ability to psychically 'see' events, sites, or information from a great distance. Bit superfluous to say it wasn't exactly successful. Echelon works at least, on the other hand, for instance, as opposed to pixie dust. CIA put effort into it. I know, but I don't think that gives it much cred. The Soviets tried it too, that's why the US tried it. It achieved nothing. Not as woo woo as you might think. Totally woo woo, IMHO, just as I thought. Sure, maybe some people are psychic or clairvoyant or even
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
when i turned on the tube that morning, finding those segments of video endlessly repeating on every channel, my very first thought was OMG *this* is why those bastards did what they did in florida, why they had to call in the supreme court. so, yeah, i have no doubt there's a lot of questions that need answering, and many wrongs to be answered for, surrounding the events of that morning. but whether the fuel was enough on its own, or whether the buildings needed a little extra help, is really beside the point to me. ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
Bob, Your link is still dodgy, why don't you use Tiny URL or something like it? http://tinyurl.com/ Your link ( the http:// could have been left off to start with ) www.worldarchitecturenews.com/index.php?fuseaction=wanappln.commentviewcomment_id=158 would then look like this, (and always work on all forums and list servers): http://tinyurl.com/la7x98 but if you like it, it may look like this : http://tinyurl.com/bobs-9-11-conspiracy-theory And imho it is always useful if you push such big items into a discussion group, even if you truly believe the conspiracy theory, you may simple check first what skeptical debunkers of the same subject have to say; It may prepare you fore what opposite comments will come up; or even make yourself think, really think, and you may decide to not forward crap to a group were you're known, and keep your reputation in good shape. ;-) E.G: http://www.debunking911.com/ http://www.jod911.com/ ... As you'll see they have covered almost all angles, and with allot more then 'believes' and 'assumptions'. And how has this something to do with biofuel or sustainability? Grts Bruno M. ~~ At 00:30 10/09/2009, From: bmolloy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Keith, The link on my last post was dodgy. This one works better http://www.worldarchitecturenews.com/index.php?fuseaction=wanappln.commentv iewcomment_id=158 If not, the full article is available below. As for facts: The discovery of nano-thermite in the WTC dust was published in The Open Chemical Physics Journal in April 2009. Regards, Bob. CONSPIRACY THEORY OR HIDDEN TRUTH? THE 9/11 ENIGMAS... Richard Gage, AIA, Gregg Roberts, and David Chandler Richard Gage, AIA has been a practicing San Francisco Bay Area architect for more than 20 years, and is a registered member of the American Institute of Architects. Most recently he worked on a $400M mixed-use facility in Las Vegas NV. But he is also the founder and CEO of Architects Engineers for 9/11 Truth, now numbering over 800 A/Es, calling for a new investigation into the destruction of all 3 WTC high-rises on 9/11. Gage has spoken at over 100 events, reaching 20 U.S. states and 8 countries. He has been invited to present in 14 cities Australia, New Zealand, and Japan before the end of this year. As the anniversary of the events approaches, Gage tells WAN why he thinks there are hidden depths to the destruction of the World Trade Centre... .. CUT.. If it doesn't start off with the preferred conclusion-of-choice and then go in search of the facts to prove it, but instead simply goes in search of facts, along with all the patient and careful cross-checking that takes, and then emerges with a fact-based conclusion that checks out, or even with just some hard facts without a conclusion well then, that's different. But AFAIK it hasn't happened yet, and don't hold yer breath. Best Keith == ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
The stargate project was spook remote viewing. Does spook mean spy or ghost, in this context? Stargate was devoted to **psychic** remote viewing, the purported ability to psychically 'see' events, sites, or information from a great distance. Bit superfluous to say it wasn't exactly successful. Echelon works at least, on the other hand, for instance, as opposed to pixie dust. CIA put effort into it. I know, but I don't think that gives it much cred. The Soviets tried it too, that's why the US tried it. It achieved nothing. Not as woo woo as you might think. Totally woo woo, IMHO, just as I thought. Sure, maybe some people are psychic or clairvoyant or even telepathic, maybe everybody is, or could be, maybe that's how the whole biosphere really works, who knows, but trying to use clairvoyance as a reliable technique for intelligence gathering or to support conspiracy theories is ludicrous. Wikipedia will do, very easy, no need to go any further: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stargate_Project Anyway, is this to suggest that a wacko like long-retired ex-Major General Stubblebine has some credibility with his 9/11 conspiracy theories, or with anything else? Because of Stargate? Stubblebine was forced to retire in 1984 and was replaced because of his obsession with the paranormal. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stargate_Project#Major_General_Albert_Stubblebine Not very surprising - The primary mission of military intelligence in the United States Army is to provide timely, relevant, accurate, and synchronized intelligence and electronic warfare support to tactical, operational and strategic-level commanders. Not a trivial matter. If you were a field commander would you want someone like Stubblebine doing that job for you? How do you explain the deception in the YouTube title? The headline says: U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event. ... Ah, so he WAS a major general once, and indeed head of army intelligence, but he retired **25 years ago**. Not quite the same thing eh. ... Why the misleading headline? Not deliberate? Hey, Kirk, do some checking first, will you, please? Best Keith Kirk The eyes see what the mind knows --- On Mon, 9/7/09, Douglas Woodard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Douglas Woodard [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Date: Monday, September 7, 2009, 9:42 AM No conspiracy was needed. Bin Laden knew what the U.S. wanted: an excuse for U.S. armies in the Middle East. The U.S. knew what Bin Laden wanted first: a major strike at the U.S., by preference at the World Trade centre (they had tried before, and it was highly symbolic). They differed on what the result of U.S. armies in the Middle East would be. Points to Bin Laden. Doug Woodard St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada Keith Addison wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFP_zKYU3aENR=1 Aarghh!! Youtube! Who's got 5 min 16 sec to spare? This is quicker... The headline says: U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event. But is he the Head of US Military Intelligence? No. It takes only the first 5 sec of Youtube for him to state that his name is Major General Albert Stubblebine, and another 10 sec to find this at wikipedia: Major General Albert Bert N. Stubblebine III was the commanding general of the United States Army Intelligence and Security Command from 1981 to 1984, when he retired from the Army. He is known for his interest in parapsychology and was a supporter of the Stargate Project. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Stubblebine Ah, so he WAS a major general once, and indeed head of army intelligence, but he retired **25 years ago**. Not quite the same thing eh. (Walked through any walls lately Bert?) That saved 5 min 1 sec, and gave a much better result. Why the misleading headline? Not deliberate? Matthew Rothschild of the Progressive again: Enough of the 9/11 Conspiracy Theories, Already http://www.alternet.org/story/41601/ If it doesn't start off with the preferred conclusion-of-choice and then go in search of the facts to prove it, but instead simply goes in search of facts, along with all the patient and careful cross-checking that takes, and then emerges with a fact-based conclusion that checks out, or even with just some hard facts without a conclusion... well then, that's different. But AFAIK it hasn't happened yet, and don't hold yer breath. Best Keith ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
No, he is outside the expectation of a military officer. Just too free a spirit perhaps. Who else retired would step up to the plate - well maybe Benton K. Partin Brigadier Gen. USAF (Ret.) 8908 Captains Row Alexandria, Virginia 22308 703-780-7652. http://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/OK/PARTIN/okm.htm oklahoma bombing Partin was a research scientist - invented the continuous rod warhead. very qualified guy. Kirk The eyes see what the mind knows --- On Tue, 9/8/09, Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Date: Tuesday, September 8, 2009, 3:11 AM The stargate project was spook remote viewing. Does spook mean spy or ghost, in this context? Stargate was devoted to **psychic** remote viewing, the purported ability to psychically 'see' events, sites, or information from a great distance. Bit superfluous to say it wasn't exactly successful. Echelon works at least, on the other hand, for instance, as opposed to pixie dust. CIA put effort into it. I know, but I don't think that gives it much cred. The Soviets tried it too, that's why the US tried it. It achieved nothing. Not as woo woo as you might think. Totally woo woo, IMHO, just as I thought. Sure, maybe some people are psychic or clairvoyant or even telepathic, maybe everybody is, or could be, maybe that's how the whole biosphere really works, who knows, but trying to use clairvoyance as a reliable technique for intelligence gathering or to support conspiracy theories is ludicrous. Wikipedia will do, very easy, no need to go any further: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stargate_Project Anyway, is this to suggest that a wacko like long-retired ex-Major General Stubblebine has some credibility with his 9/11 conspiracy theories, or with anything else? Because of Stargate? Stubblebine was forced to retire in 1984 and was replaced because of his obsession with the paranormal. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stargate_Project#Major_General_Albert_Stubblebine Not very surprising - The primary mission of military intelligence in the United States Army is to provide timely, relevant, accurate, and synchronized intelligence and electronic warfare support to tactical, operational and strategic-level commanders. Not a trivial matter. If you were a field commander would you want someone like Stubblebine doing that job for you? How do you explain the deception in the YouTube title? The headline says: U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event. ... Ah, so he WAS a major general once, and indeed head of army intelligence, but he retired **25 years ago**. Not quite the same thing eh. ... Why the misleading headline? Not deliberate? Hey, Kirk, do some checking first, will you, please? Best Keith Kirk The eyes see what the mind knows --- On Mon, 9/7/09, Douglas Woodard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Douglas Woodard [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Date: Monday, September 7, 2009, 9:42 AM No conspiracy was needed. Bin Laden knew what the U.S. wanted: an excuse for U.S. armies in the Middle East. The U.S. knew what Bin Laden wanted first: a major strike at the U.S., by preference at the World Trade centre (they had tried before, and it was highly symbolic). They differed on what the result of U.S. armies in the Middle East would be. Points to Bin Laden. Doug Woodard St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada Keith Addison wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFP_zKYU3aENR=1 Aarghh!! Youtube! Who's got 5 min 16 sec to spare? This is quicker... The headline says: U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event. But is he the Head of US Military Intelligence? No. It takes only the first 5 sec of Youtube for him to state that his name is Major General Albert Stubblebine, and another 10 sec to find this at wikipedia: Major General Albert Bert N. Stubblebine III was the commanding general of the United States Army Intelligence and Security Command from 1981 to 1984, when he retired from the Army. He is known for his interest in parapsychology and was a supporter of the Stargate Project. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Stubblebine Ah, so he WAS a major general once, and indeed head of army intelligence, but he retired **25 years ago**. Not quite the same thing eh. (Walked through any walls lately Bert?) That saved 5 min 1 sec, and gave a much better result. Why the misleading headline? Not deliberate? Matthew Rothschild of the Progressive again: Enough of the 9/11 Conspiracy Theories, Already http://www.alternet.org/story/41601/ If it doesn't start off with the preferred conclusion
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
No, he is outside the expectation of a military officer. Just too free a spirit perhaps. More like a deluded one perhaps, or a somewhat deranged one perhaps. Let's put it this way: it's sheer BS, it shouldn't even have been posted. Who else retired would step up to the plate No need to put it quite so nobly. Step up with what, is the question. Stepping up with fact-free conspiracisms and perhaps not being very honest about it isn't a contribution to anything other than confusion. - well maybe Benton K. Partin Brigadier Gen. USAF (Ret.) 8908 Captains Row Alexandria, Virginia 22308 703-780-7652. http://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/OK/PARTIN/okm.htm oklahoma bombing My word, Kirk, you will have your conspiracies won't you. Got any facts rather than just claims and opinions and assertions? I mean, got any that someone like me will accept as facts? The list itself is the same, it has a long and honorable tradition of being rigorous, as you know. We're quite happy to explore possibilities or we wouldn't have achieved what we have, but sheer conjecture dressed up as fact isn't included. Partin was a research scientist - invented the continuous rod warhead. very qualified guy. Made bombs, nice. Couldn't we have done without more and better bombs? Best Keith Kirk The eyes see what the mind knows --- On Tue, 9/8/09, Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Date: Tuesday, September 8, 2009, 3:11 AM The stargate project was spook remote viewing. Does spook mean spy or ghost, in this context? Stargate was devoted to **psychic** remote viewing, the purported ability to psychically 'see' events, sites, or information from a great distance. Bit superfluous to say it wasn't exactly successful. Echelon works at least, on the other hand, for instance, as opposed to pixie dust. CIA put effort into it. I know, but I don't think that gives it much cred. The Soviets tried it too, that's why the US tried it. It achieved nothing. Not as woo woo as you might think. Totally woo woo, IMHO, just as I thought. Sure, maybe some people are psychic or clairvoyant or even telepathic, maybe everybody is, or could be, maybe that's how the whole biosphere really works, who knows, but trying to use clairvoyance as a reliable technique for intelligence gathering or to support conspiracy theories is ludicrous. Wikipedia will do, very easy, no need to go any further: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stargate_Project Anyway, is this to suggest that a wacko like long-retired ex-Major General Stubblebine has some credibility with his 9/11 conspiracy theories, or with anything else? Because of Stargate? Stubblebine was forced to retire in 1984 and was replaced because of his obsession with the paranormal. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stargate_Project#Major_General_Albert_Stubblebine Not very surprising - The primary mission of military intelligence in the United States Army is to provide timely, relevant, accurate, and synchronized intelligence and electronic warfare support to tactical, operational and strategic-level commanders. Not a trivial matter. If you were a field commander would you want someone like Stubblebine doing that job for you? How do you explain the deception in the YouTube title? The headline says: U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event. ... Ah, so he WAS a major general once, and indeed head of army intelligence, but he retired **25 years ago**. Not quite the same thing eh. ... Why the misleading headline? Not deliberate? Hey, Kirk, do some checking first, will you, please? Best Keith Kirk The eyes see what the mind knows --- On Mon, 9/7/09, Douglas Woodard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Douglas Woodard [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Date: Monday, September 7, 2009, 9:42 AM No conspiracy was needed. Bin Laden knew what the U.S. wanted: an excuse for U.S. armies in the Middle East. The U.S. knew what Bin Laden wanted first: a major strike at the U.S., by preference at the World Trade centre (they had tried before, and it was highly symbolic). They differed on what the result of U.S. armies in the Middle East would be. Points to Bin Laden. Doug Woodard St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada Keith Addison wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFP_zKYU3aENR=1 Aarghh!! Youtube! Who's got 5 min 16 sec to spare? This is quicker... The headline says: U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event. But is he the Head of US Military Intelligence? No. It takes only the first 5 sec of Youtube for him to state that his name is Major General Albert Stubblebine
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFP_zKYU3aENR=1 Aarghh!! Youtube! Who's got 5 min 16 sec to spare? This is quicker... The headline says: U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event. But is he the Head of US Military Intelligence? No. It takes only the first 5 sec of Youtube for him to state that his name is Major General Albert Stubblebine, and another 10 sec to find this at wikipedia: Major General Albert Bert N. Stubblebine III was the commanding general of the United States Army Intelligence and Security Command from 1981 to 1984, when he retired from the Army. He is known for his interest in parapsychology and was a supporter of the Stargate Project. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Stubblebine Ah, so he WAS a major general once, and indeed head of army intelligence, but he retired **25 years ago**. Not quite the same thing eh. (Walked through any walls lately Bert?) That saved 5 min 1 sec, and gave a much better result. Why the misleading headline? Not deliberate? Matthew Rothschild of the Progressive again: Enough of the 9/11 Conspiracy Theories, Already http://www.alternet.org/story/41601/ If it doesn't start off with the preferred conclusion-of-choice and then go in search of the facts to prove it, but instead simply goes in search of facts, along with all the patient and careful cross-checking that takes, and then emerges with a fact-based conclusion that checks out, or even with just some hard facts without a conclusion... well then, that's different. But AFAIK it hasn't happened yet, and don't hold yer breath. Best Keith ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
No conspiracy was needed. Bin Laden knew what the U.S. wanted: an excuse for U.S. armies in the Middle East. The U.S. knew what Bin Laden wanted first: a major strike at the U.S., by preference at the World Trade centre (they had tried before, and it was highly symbolic). They differed on what the result of U.S. armies in the Middle East would be. Points to Bin Laden. Doug Woodard St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada Keith Addison wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFP_zKYU3aENR=1 Aarghh!! Youtube! Who's got 5 min 16 sec to spare? This is quicker... The headline says: U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event. But is he the Head of US Military Intelligence? No. It takes only the first 5 sec of Youtube for him to state that his name is Major General Albert Stubblebine, and another 10 sec to find this at wikipedia: Major General Albert Bert N. Stubblebine III was the commanding general of the United States Army Intelligence and Security Command from 1981 to 1984, when he retired from the Army. He is known for his interest in parapsychology and was a supporter of the Stargate Project. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Stubblebine Ah, so he WAS a major general once, and indeed head of army intelligence, but he retired **25 years ago**. Not quite the same thing eh. (Walked through any walls lately Bert?) That saved 5 min 1 sec, and gave a much better result. Why the misleading headline? Not deliberate? Matthew Rothschild of the Progressive again: Enough of the 9/11 Conspiracy Theories, Already http://www.alternet.org/story/41601/ If it doesn't start off with the preferred conclusion-of-choice and then go in search of the facts to prove it, but instead simply goes in search of facts, along with all the patient and careful cross-checking that takes, and then emerges with a fact-based conclusion that checks out, or even with just some hard facts without a conclusion... well then, that's different. But AFAIK it hasn't happened yet, and don't hold yer breath. Best Keith ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
Hi Doug No conspiracy was needed. Bin Laden knew what the U.S. wanted: an excuse for U.S. armies in the Middle East. The U.S. knew what Bin Laden wanted first: a major strike at the U.S., by preference at the World Trade centre (they had tried before, and it was highly symbolic). AFAIK, Bin Laden never admitted responsibility for 9/11. Various statements purportedly by Bin Laden claiming he did it tend not to survive close scrutiny. He denied it several times: http://911review.com/articles/usamah/khilafah.html http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/16/inv.binladen.denial/ http://www.911omissionreport.com/bin_laden_denies.html He said it was carried out by individuals with their own motivation or for their own personal reasons. Or that was his opinion, but if he didn't do it himself why would he know anything more than anyone else about who did? And if he did do it, why would he deny it? At its Most Wanted Terrorists web page the FBI says Usama Bin Laden is wanted in connection with the August 7, 1998, bombings of the United States Embassies in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya. These attacks killed over 200 people. In addition, Bin Laden is a suspect in other terrorist attacks throughout the world. But it doesn't mention 9/11. http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/terrorists/terbinladen.htm Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI, commented: The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Usama Bin Laden's Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11. http://valis.gnn.tv/blogs/15910/June_6_2006_FBI_says_No_hard_evidence_connecting_Bin_Laden_to_9_11 On September 20 2001, the Taliban offered to hand Osama bin Laden to a neutral Islamic country for trial if the US presented them with evidence that he was responsible for the attacks on New York and Washington. The US rejected the offer. (Twice.) http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2003/nov/11/afghanistan.iraq And Al-Qaida is just a fantasy, there was no such worldwide network of sleeper cells and so on just waiting to strike and it was only a matter of time, it simply didn't exist, they made it up. The neo-cons are real aces at starting with the desired conclusion and filling in the facts as you go along, they've been doing that since the Reagan era. Phantom enemies - but they tend to become real if you demonise them enough and chuck a few billion bucks at it. They differed on what the result of U.S. armies in the Middle East would be. Points to Bin Laden. Indeed. As a French diplomat commented at the time: Monsieur Bin Laden must be tres satisfied. Anyway, no perps you could shake a charge-sheet at, and the whole thing remains about as clear as ketchup. Some big jets flew into some big buildings in the US and lots of people were killed, and beyond that? I know FOR A FACT that the World Trade Center was hit by laser beams from a secret US military space station... Right. Best Keith Doug Woodard St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada Keith Addison wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFP_zKYU3aENR=1 Aarghh!! Youtube! Who's got 5 min 16 sec to spare? This is quicker... The headline says: U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event. But is he the Head of US Military Intelligence? No. It takes only the first 5 sec of Youtube for him to state that his name is Major General Albert Stubblebine, and another 10 sec to find this at wikipedia: Major General Albert Bert N. Stubblebine III was the commanding general of the United States Army Intelligence and Security Command from 1981 to 1984, when he retired from the Army. He is known for his interest in parapsychology and was a supporter of the Stargate Project. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Stubblebine Ah, so he WAS a major general once, and indeed head of army intelligence, but he retired **25 years ago**. Not quite the same thing eh. (Walked through any walls lately Bert?) That saved 5 min 1 sec, and gave a much better result. Why the misleading headline? Not deliberate? Matthew Rothschild of the Progressive again: Enough of the 9/11 Conspiracy Theories, Already http://www.alternet.org/story/41601/ If it doesn't start off with the preferred conclusion-of-choice and then go in search of the facts to prove it, but instead simply goes in search of facts, along with all the patient and careful cross-checking that takes, and then emerges with a fact-based conclusion that checks out, or even with just some hard facts without a conclusion... well then, that's different. But AFAIK it hasn't happened yet, and don't hold yer breath. Best Keith ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
The stargate project was spook remote viewing. CIA put effort into it. Not as woo woo as you might think. Kirk The eyes see what the mind knows --- On Mon, 9/7/09, Douglas Woodard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Douglas Woodard [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Date: Monday, September 7, 2009, 9:42 AM No conspiracy was needed. Bin Laden knew what the U.S. wanted: an excuse for U.S. armies in the Middle East. The U.S. knew what Bin Laden wanted first: a major strike at the U.S., by preference at the World Trade centre (they had tried before, and it was highly symbolic). They differed on what the result of U.S. armies in the Middle East would be. Points to Bin Laden. Doug Woodard St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada Keith Addison wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFP_zKYU3aENR=1 Aarghh!! Youtube! Who's got 5 min 16 sec to spare? This is quicker... The headline says: U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event. But is he the Head of US Military Intelligence? No. It takes only the first 5 sec of Youtube for him to state that his name is Major General Albert Stubblebine, and another 10 sec to find this at wikipedia: Major General Albert Bert N. Stubblebine III was the commanding general of the United States Army Intelligence and Security Command from 1981 to 1984, when he retired from the Army. He is known for his interest in parapsychology and was a supporter of the Stargate Project. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Stubblebine Ah, so he WAS a major general once, and indeed head of army intelligence, but he retired **25 years ago**. Not quite the same thing eh. (Walked through any walls lately Bert?) That saved 5 min 1 sec, and gave a much better result. Why the misleading headline? Not deliberate? Matthew Rothschild of the Progressive again: Enough of the 9/11 Conspiracy Theories, Already http://www.alternet.org/story/41601/ If it doesn't start off with the preferred conclusion-of-choice and then go in search of the facts to prove it, but instead simply goes in search of facts, along with all the patient and careful cross-checking that takes, and then emerges with a fact-based conclusion that checks out, or even with just some hard facts without a conclusion... well then, that's different. But AFAIK it hasn't happened yet, and don't hold yer breath. Best Keith ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090907/a902018e/attachment.html ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
