Premier Rock Forum

Posted: **Wed Apr 02, 2008 10:00 pm**

yeah, the words really aren't arranged in a way where it says something coherent. even if it's been posted 4 times now, it's still not a lucid sentence.

Posted: **Wed Apr 02, 2008 10:29 pm**

I kicked myself when it initially happened that the light didn't go off

This is the most incoherent clause. I think what he means is that when he watched Loose Change he kicked himself for not having realized that something was fishy with 9/11 as it actually went down. You can fix the crazy temporality by moving the prepositional phrase ("when it initially happened") to the end of the clause:

(When I watched Loose Change)I kicked myself that the light didn't go off when [9/11] initially happened.

Technically, I think he should have gone with the past perfect tense for the second verb phrase, too ["hadn't gone off"]

but I was so shocked that this thing had even taken place that I apologize for not being more aware

Here he says that the initial shock of the event clouded his ability to consider it critically and in retrospect he feels sorry about that lapse in critical acumen.

Even still Jesse has once again scooped CBS, NBS, ABC...

Posted: **Wed Apr 02, 2008 10:48 pm**

I think the exact same thing I've thought for years. It seems fishy, it could well have been demolished, but I really don't and likely won't ever know the reality of it. Nothing's changed after lo these many years, which is why it's not something I'm compelled to talk about frequently. There's no news yet. Maybe the insider whistleblower will come forward with an undeniable smoking gun. Until then, it's just years and years of people jerking themselves off over the potential. But without proof, it's useless.

Nothing's changed about what I think about 9/11. I'm just as open to the conspiracy stuff as ever. Only difference is now I've been subjected to years of a mind-numbing assault of name-calling that would otherwise encourage me to *not* consider the alternative possibilities. But still, I have my own ideas.

The fact that you give a shit about anything Jesse Ventura says... that's just another in a long series of hypocrisies/contradictions/irrationalities I've seen from you.

And Luther, that makes sense the way you've broken it down. Man he didn't put that thought together well. But it sounds right, what you've suggested he was trying to communicate. Thanks!

Posted: **Wed Apr 02, 2008 11:14 pm**

Rick Reuben wrote:What are you waiting for? Noam Chomsky? Jesus?

Err, it sounds like he's waiting for someone with actual evidence, not a guy who formed an opinion after watching the same internet videos as everyone else.

Posted: **Wed Apr 02, 2008 11:28 pm**

Rick Reuben wrote:
scott wrote:I think the exact same thing I've thought for years. It seems fishy, it could well have been demolished, but I really don't and likely won't ever know the reality of it.
The fact that you give a shit about anything Jesse Ventura says...
You topped yourself again. Ventura says something that makes perfect sense, and Scott demands that I ignore it, because he dislikes the source. Is his skepticism grounded in reality? That's the only question you need to ask yourself. Instead, like a typical sheep, you play 'attack the messenger'. Congratulations, Scott- you think Ventura might be onto something, but you'd rather not know what he thinks. What are you waiting for? Noam Chomsky? Jesus? If Jesus came down and said 9/11 was an inside job, would you suddenly develop the intestinal fortitude to stand up on this and be counted?

You have no balls for any 9/11 Truth. You're hiding under the covers, hoping it blows over, and hoping you're never forced to come down one way or the other on it. Total fence sitter. The hilarious thing is that you're patting yourself on the back for your cowardice.

Scott: "I refused to speak out about a mass murder possibly pinned on the wrong people, but I had a good reason to zip my mouth: a guy on a message board talked about it, and I disliked him! Looks like all responsibility to speak out is off my shoulders. What a relief."

You'd rather shut up about the biggest crime of our generation than risk having your skepticism overlap with mine on the goddamn EAF forum. Way to set your priorities. Complete paralysis in the face of peer pressure. How embarrassing for you. As it turns out, I completely control your opinion on 9/11! Any public statement you make on it is filtered through this question: "Can I agree with Reuben and still be in the EA clique?" How completely selfish of you to value your status on a internet forum above your responsibility as a citizen.
scott wrote:But without proof, it's useless.

Wrong. Public opinion wins this case. All it takes is for the public to force a new investigation. Do you have the guts to call for a new investigation, and reject the existing sham?

Try it. You might be able to post that and not be ostracized by your internet friends. You've built substantial capital here. I think you can risk it.
scott wrote:There's no news yet.
Are you insane? 9/11 Truth has gone from about 1% of the country to over half of the country seeing the official story as horseshit. If no 'news' prompted that, how did it happen? There's been a constant drumbeat of news poking hole after hole in the official story. But you really are waiting to see it all tied together in one tidy package on 60 Minutes, aren't you? Standing on the sidelines until then? God, you're an embarrassment.

This is great. I'm glad to have quoted this. I'm glad you wrote it. I hope someday you have a clear enough head that you can look back and cringe. It will be a great day, though bittersweet.

Here's your new best friend, Ventura, as described by a source you find worthy, Wikipedia.

wikipedia, re: Jesse Ventura's time as governor of MN wrote:Ventura's main campaign promise was a tax refund to Minnesota residents. The state was running a budget surplus at the time, and Ventura believed that the money should be given back to the public. In political debates, he often admitted that he had not formed an opinion on certain policy questions. Sharing many views with libertarians, Ventura frequently described himself as "fiscally conservative and socially liberal."

.

1. Giving out free money, which I'll bet you've accused Bush of being an evil Elite for having done.

2. In public debates, admitted he had not formed opinions on policy questions. Aside from being the mark of your antithesis (i.e. no opinion), this is something you just called me "no balls", "hiding", "fence-sitter", "cowardice" etc... but Ventura is a great source for you, right? You'll ignore that he showed the same quality, since he has Libertarian leanings and he said your same canned line about WTC7.

3. Ventura described himself as "socially liberal". Wait, Mr. Rick's Source Ventura, don't you mean "SELLOUT LIBERAL"?!?!

Get some rest, Bob. Look at this tomorrow ,and if you can rationalize your way through this post thinking you're right and you don't look insane to anybody who isn't insane, then call them up and ask them to come take you to Jupiter or wherever you think They will come and take you when you save the world from it's weak, closedminded sheep sleep.

Posted: **Thu Apr 03, 2008 12:11 am**

Rick Reuben wrote:You will scrounge for any reason to stay on the sidelines and not stand up for the victims of this fraud.

Rick Reuben wrote:Wow. Okay, I'm bored enough to break it down for you.

Way to channel your boredom into a fictional noble act you're doing for the victims. Too bad that your demeanor and rationality do more to hurt "the cause" then help it.

Rick Reuben wrote:I predict that it will take Jesus to move you, but perhaps Albini can do it for you.

RR:"Hey, Scott- what do you think about WTC7?"

S:"Looks fishy."

RR:"Jesse Ventura just agreed with you."

S:"He agreed with me?? That's terrible. Let's not talk about WTC7. Let's talk about Ventura."

RR:"He agrees with you."

S:"Let's talk about Ventura. Or his sentence. I disliked his sentence. "

RR: "What does his sentence have to do with that building that was not hit by a plane or burned falling down in 7 seconds?"

S:"Let's talk about Ventura."

RR:"What about 9/11?"

S:"Nope. Ventura. Sorry Rick- I came to your 9/11 thread to talk about Jesse Ventura. Indulge me."

RR: "Aren't you the same jerk who's always demanding that I never refer to 9/11 anywhere on the forum except in this thread?"

S:" Yes, but that rule doesn't apply to me. I get to come to the 9/11 thread to change the topic to parts of Ventura's life that have nothing to do with 9/11."

Gee Rick, you're right, sorry I bumped the thread today to try and show how things were fresh and new cause of what Ventura said. I shouldn't have brought him into this in the first place.

Posted: **Thu Apr 03, 2008 12:21 am**

scott wrote:Gee Rick, you're right, sorry I bumped the thread today .

You didn't bump the thread. I did. You just kneejerk attacked the messenger.

scott wrote:Too bad that your demeanor and rationality do more to hurt "the cause" then help it.

How can I be doing anything for or against the cause?? I thought it was entirely useless to post political threads here, according to you experts. Funny how I make so many of you panic over and over about things nobody ever reads. I really love how you nutballs fluctuate back and forth between claiming that the forum has no impact on anything, to claiming that my posts damage the movement. Speaks volumes about the general disorganization of your mind.

Congratulations to former MN Governor Jesse Ventura, who sharply criticized the official 9/11 story today:

"I kicked myself when it initially happened that the light didn't go off but I was so shocked that this thing had even taken place that I apologize for not being more aware," said Ventura, adding that watching Loose Change at the insistence of his son was part of the catalyst for his wake up call.

"When I finally did watch it I went through every emotion you could imagine, from laughing, crying, getting sick to my stomach, to the whole emotional thing," said the former Governor.

"To me questions haven't been answered and are not being answered about 9/11," said Ventura, before highlighting the collapse of Building 7, a 47-story tall skyscraper that was not hit by a plane but collapsed in its own footprint in the late afternoon of September 11.

"Two planes struck two buildings....but how is it that a third building fell 5 hours later?" asked Ventura, "How could this building just implode into its own footprint 5 hours later - that's my first question - the 9/11 Commission didn't even devote one page to that in their big volume of investigation," added the former Governor.

Posted: **Thu Apr 03, 2008 4:41 am**

Rick Reuben wrote:

What the hell.

Posted: **Thu Apr 03, 2008 10:35 am**

ivan wrote:still no dice bob. if that many people were involved, somebody on the inside. would have spoken by now.

.

Not yet;
7 years are not enough to breach a criminal coscience
weakening a criminal psychology.
Time and money(huge mountains of money)are irrilevants
for criminal minds that regularly deal with such issues.
Something else has to happen to touch the heart of
a criminal;
something that is unpredictable and strictly connected
to the personality of the subject.

Buscetta,one of the "godfathers",was in South America,rich,healthy
and safe,but only when "something" happened touching his heart
he accepted to cooperate with the judge Falcone,revealing all the
unknown(politicals,economicals) high levels of Cosa Nostra.

About the evidence not evident:
Al Capone was arrested for "tax evasion",not as the top criminal level
of Cosa Nostra in Chicago.

About the evidence not evident:
in the first Iraq war(G.Bush senior)all the journalist and press were
selected by a military crew.
Journalist weren't allowed to go around independently and without
permission and control of the US NAVY military.
The military propaganda told the international press that
everything would have been easy,fast,and decided from the sky.
The international community watchingTV,eating popcorns,witnessed
the assassination of a million of innocents killed by missiles and bombs.

About the evidence not evident:
"Weapons mass destruction" was the excuse for G:W:Bush admin.to lie
the entire planet,invading Iraq,assassinating another million of innocents,
hanging Saddam Hussein after a not legal trial,claiming a never released
victory.

About the evidence not evident:
Guantanamo is the high-living locations where the Talibans go in vacation,
swimming,drinking avogado juice,romanticly watching the full moon every night with their families.

About the evidence not evident:
September 11 2001
Right after the first airplane hijacked into the towers
CNN was already announcing all over the world that America was under attack by the terrorists of Osama BinLaden,so that changing the history
of this planet since then.

The evidence not evident is the scary ostrich putting his head underground;
The evidence not evident is also the turkey that fights and wins against
the viper

Salut a tutt
IsotonaG

Posted: **Thu Apr 03, 2008 12:57 pm**

First, I that I think a lot of the 911 questioning material deserves to be looked at. The Stephen Jones material relating to WTC Building 7 and the thermite levels in that and the other two buildings comes to mind.

As the 911 Truth movement takes off, you can be sure it will become an inviting target for government infiltration for use in tweaking that particular public opinion zone, if it hasn't happened already. How would one be able to tell if this has happened or not? Well some things to look out for, I would think, would be those parts of 911 Truth that takes on the inflexible dogma-parroting aspect that one usually associates with left and right wing sheep herders. Demands for unquestioning loyalty to the cause, thwarting of any attempt at conversation, discussion, open dialogue. Belittling of critics, even the unworthy ones, in a heavy-handed snide superior fashion that appeals to social climbing instincts rather than the actual contending with the logic of their criticism.

If the 911 movement really takes off, expect to see certain Stanford Prison Experiment behaviors re-enacted. Pay close attention to those people who attempt to man the helm. Cheer them on, where appropriate, because their targets most definitely need to be brought down, but keep an eye on them.

Premier Rock Forum

The 9/11 Cover Up Ends: July 9, 2008

The 9-11 Cover Up Ends: July 9, 2008

The 9-11 Cover Up Ends: July 9, 2008

The 9-11 Cover Up Ends: July 9, 2008

The 9-11 Cover Up Ends: July 9, 2008

The 9-11 Cover Up Ends: July 9, 2008

The 9-11 Cover Up Ends: July 9, 2008

The 9-11 Cover Up Ends: July 9, 2008

The 9-11 Cover Up Ends: July 9, 2008

The 9-11 Cover Up Ends: July 9, 2008

The 9-11 Cover Up Ends: July 9, 2008