|
|
David
Joined: 20 Oct 2000
Posts: 1381
|
Dusty's childlike demands
 Mon Apr 10, 2006 12:14 am
|
 |
|
It is truly amazing how many people come to these forums and DEMAND that we prove to them what we believe to be happening.
When their demands are not met they resort to the same tactics of one Jayhole Reynolds.
You, sunny boy, came to a site dedicated to chemtrail investigation, no one came out to your house and dragged you here kicking and screaming.
Come to my home and pull the same crap and I'd throw your butt out the door.
Ask polite, play nice, do some of your OWN research and not expect others to just hand you information when you make uncalled for demands.
quote:
I am on the verge of looking at both sides of the story
I suggest you do just that, look at both sides and not tell us that what we have spent years researching is not viable information and should be discounted because you, in all of you infinite knowledge do not believe it. |
| |
|
|
Dusty
Joined: 07 Apr 2006
Posts: 34
|
| Re: Dusty's childlike demands
Mon Apr 10, 2006 12:56 am
|
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by David
It is truly amazing how many people come to these forums and DEMAND that we prove to them what we believe to be happening.
When their demands are not met they resort to the same tactics of one Jayhole Reynolds.
You, sunny boy, came to a site dedicated to chemtrail investigation, no one came out to your house and dragged you here kicking and screaming.
Come to my home and pull the same crap and I'd throw your butt out the door.
Ask polite, play nice, do some of your OWN research and not expect others to just hand you information when you make uncalled for demands.
Wow, you are quite ignorant. Didn't you just read my earlier post (the one right before your's above)? Haven't you even noticed that I already conceded my earlier opinion. If you had read my prior post, it was polite and was a concession to Stallion4's great points. DO NOT PROVOKE me any further, as I have already politely conceded my point. You better shut your mouth and respect my change of heart. For one thing, you should be fortunate that this site has enough viable information to be able to convince a public who is still very much afraid to open up to the hard truth (I am proof of that, because I was once such a believer of the official 9/11 story, and now I have serious doubts about it). My change of heart and change of beliefs is a compliment to the credibility of this site.
We should remain humble when trying to inform others and we should always try to understand that the public is in a difficult transition period from relying on mainstream media to the alternative media, because it is still not often that people are willing to concede their old opinions to more credible ones. You should respect the fact that I was able to listen to Stallion4's posts (without trying to attack his posts with irrational and repetitive strawman's arguements which the 9/11 government story advocates often resort to). Not many people who are so committed to the official 9/11 story are even willing to take the progressive transitional step which I just did. I have taken a positive step forward in the right direction (the direction which supports Stallion4's points). TRY to focus on this current positive instead of my older "childlike demands" which hold no credibility.
Again, you should read my post (the one right before your's). Your hostility towards me is untimely. On the other hand, Stallion4 ought to be complimented for his ability to make such great posts that, in my opinion, are far more credible than the official 9/11 government story. I see no holes in Stallion4's points, and this is why I had to concede to it. If Stallion4 were to publish his 9/11 posts all over the web, I believe that more of the public will open up to the fact that 9/11 was truly a government inside job.  |
| |
|
|
stallion4
Joined: 20 Dec 2004
Posts: 421
|
|
Mon Apr 10, 2006 3:31 am
|
|
|
Hi Dusty. Thank you for your honesty. You are not alone. I once also thought that everything that my government and mainstream media told me was true. Unfortunately, it's not. And if you dig deeper, you'll also discover it's not too.
If you're still not 100% convinced that 9-11 was an inside job, have a listen to these interviews:
Pacifica Radio host Bonnie Faulkner interviews Dr. David Ray Griffin
Wednesday, March 29th, 2006
"Explosive Testimony: The 911 Oral Histories" with author and theologian, Dr. David Ray Griffin. As the result of a lawsuit brought by the New York Times and several families of 911 victims, the New York Court of Appeals ordered the city to release hundreds of oral histories of 911 witnesses. These witness testimonies were originally gathered shortly after September 11th on the order of Thomas Von Essen, the City Fire Commissioner, who said he wanted to preserve these accounts before they became reshaped by a collective memory. In these oral histories, Firefighters and Emergency Medical Workers recount their experiences of that day:
http://www.911blogger.com/files/audio/Griffin20060329-Wed1300.mp3
Former Head Of Star Wars Program Says Cheney Main 9/11 Suspect.
Official version of events a conspiracy theory, says drills were cover for attacks:
http://www.prisonplanet.tv/audio/030406bowman.htm
And then have a look at this if you get a chance:
Dr. Steven Jones' Utah Seminar - Video Stream from Google:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=964034652002408586
If you would like to download the vid to your computer, paste the link here and click 'Download':
http://keepvid.com/
FYI, David is not ignorant - he's frustrated. Big difference. Once you've been in this game as long as we have, you will understand that difference...
_________________
"You don't need a weather man to know which way the wind blows" |
| |
|
|
David
Joined: 20 Oct 2000
Posts: 1381
|
|
Mon Apr 10, 2006 5:50 am
|
|
|
quote:
DO NOT PROVOKE me any further,
quote:
You better shut your mouth and respect my change of heart.
or what, pray tell. Second error, don't make veiled threats to members, it's not polite.
LMAO... |
| |
|
|
Dusty
Joined: 07 Apr 2006
Posts: 34
|
|
Mon Apr 10, 2006 8:30 pm
|
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by stallion4
FYI, David is not ignorant - he's frustrated. Big difference. Once you've been in this game as long as we have, you will understand that difference...
Very well, I'll try understand his frustration. Afterall it has already been about 4 years since 9/11 and there has still been no real effective complete investigation into who is behind those attacks.
David, maybe if you stopped your frustration towards me and recognize that I am beginning to open up to your side of the arguement (those who refuse to be brainwashed by mainstream and government propaganda), then I too will no longer retaliate.
So let's keep it at that and move on. I take Stallion4's posts very seriously, as well as other credible posts done by other members here. I don't want to turn this thread into a degeneration of childish exchanges, for I believe it would be a slap on the face of the credibility of this site. You are right, and I was wrong.
Now on to 9/11, I am currently about 90% in doubt of the official story. A few days ago I was 50%. Well I read somewhere in the net that there is this really big smoking gun which could indicate government complicity. I just want to know from the people here what you all think of this:
That in 1976 the U.S. military was considering using airline breaching methods such as using plastic boxcutters, while planning airplane attacks on the WTC, and this was to be "piggy-backed" on top of 'training excercises' for a military study. One of military insiders who took part in this "study" is named Michael Teague. He said that the planes were not enough to destroy the buildings completely, so he suggested using the aid of pre-rigged explosives to bring the towers down. Source:
http://www.arcticbeacon.com/23-Mar-2005.html
http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/perfect_plan_level_twin_towers_created_1976.htm
http://www.total911.info/2006/03/1976-military-study-considered.html
There is also a current U.S. Federal Agent named Timothy McNiven, who says that he also took part in this 1976 Military Study. He has his own official website that shows these documents from the 1976 plans:
http://www.codenamegrillfire.com/index.php?n=1&id=1
I want to know if this has been confirmed? Does any of you have more information about this? Stallion4, what's your take on this? |
| |
|
|
Jeanie
Joined: 18 Nov 2001
Posts: 1323
Location: North East U.S.A. |
| Congratulations
Mon Apr 10, 2006 10:43 pm
|
|
|
Dusty; I respect a man or woman who, upon examining reputable reports on any given issue, is humble enough to publically acknowledge they were mistaken. I seriously congratulate you. I've learned a lesson here too, not to be so impatient when a forum poster comes on and says, there are no chemtrails, only harmless contrails. That subject may be for another day.  |
| |
|
|
stallion4
Joined: 20 Dec 2004
Posts: 421
|
|
Tue Apr 11, 2006 2:40 am
|
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dusty
Stallion4, what's your take on this?
I heard about this when the story first came out last year. He sounds credible from an interview I listened to, but I honestly don't know if he's telling the truth or not. And as far as I know, his story has not been corroborated by anyone else publicly as of yet. So my take is that this is just another interesting story that is worth taking into consideration, however, I personally don't bring that story up to others if I'm trying to explain to them that the official story of 9-11 is a lie. IMHO there is far more credible evidence out there that points toward government complicity in the "attacks" such as officials receiving warnings on Sept 10th to cancel their flights on the 11th because of "security concerns" (too bad the rest of us didn't receive those warnings). If you have more time to invest in researching 9-11, here are some websites that I recommend:
http://911research.wtc7.net/
http://www.pentagonresearch.com/
http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html
http://newsmine.org/archive/9-11/questions
http://www.geocities.com/killtown/
Killtown is one of my personal favorite 9-11 researchers. His compilation of 'Smoking Guns found in the Mainstream Media' is an excellent source of information:
200+ 9/11 'Smoking Guns'
Found in the Mainstream Media
(last updated: 04/09/2006)
http://killtown.911review.org/911smokingguns.html
I hope these websites will help you discover the truth about what really happened on 9-11, Dusty.
Take care,
S4
_________________
"You don't need a weather man to know which way the wind blows" |
| |
|
|
Ronda860
Joined: 18 Feb 2006
Posts: 31
Location: Northeast Wisconsin |
|
Tue Apr 11, 2006 7:02 pm
|
|
|
An article I came across on Officer.com
Six NYC 9/11 Officers Stricken With Brain Cancer
Updated: April 10th, 2006 03:59 PM EDT
E-mail Story Print Story Most Read Most Emailed
CARL CAMPANILE and SUSAN EDELMAN
New York Post
April 9, 2006 -- An alarming number of 9/11 responders have been stricken with brain cancer - including six NYPD cops, The Post has learned.
At least 11 of the Ground Zero rescue and recovery workers and their families claim in a class-action lawsuit - which includes dozens of other cancer victims - that toxic air and dust caused or triggered the rare, often fatal, brain illness.
Three brain-cancer victims have died, raising the total death toll in a 7,300-plaintiff lawsuit brought by workers and their families to 41, said lead attorney David Worby.
They include Stephen "Rak" Yurek, 46, a Port Authority emergency technician from Bayonne, N.J., who died Dec. 11 after a 16-month illness. He left behind a wife and four children ages 10 to 25.
His widow, Mary Ellen, said he was healthy before his 2004 diagnosis.
"He was never sick a day in his life," she told The Post.
_________________
"The frog does not drink up the pond in which he lives."
-Native American Proverb |
| |
|
|
 
|
|
 Goto page Previous
1, 2, 3
All times are GMT. The time now is Sat May 26, 2012 8:13 pm
|
|
|
|
|
Login
