FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in 
Uncovered: The Rat's Nest of 9/11
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 11, 12, 13 ... 40, 41, 42  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> General Discussion
  ::  Previous topic :: Next topic  
Author Message
Rumpl4skn



Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Posts: 2950
Location: 36� 3'N x 86�40'W

PostPosted: Sun Feb 12, 2006 12:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Okay, I'm brand new here, as I'm sure you can tell because there's a "1" assigned to this post.

I've listened to a few of Fintan's MP3's. I wholeheartedly agree on his take on the sham that is our 2-party system. I was a bit shocked at this Rat's Nest issue, because a few people I've implicitly been sympathetic to are listed.

Sibel Edmonds is a rat? I know Michael Ruppoert is an ego-maniac, but he's brought a ton of people into the movement. I've read Wayne Madsen and always found him to be a bit odd, but he's NSA? If he's really put up by the NSA I would think his website would look less like it was designed by a kid in 6th grade on a 386 PC in the old Paint app.

In one MP3 Fintan exclaims (paraphrased), "Why would we be suddenly blessed with a millionaire like Jimmy Walter throwing his money into the 9/11 truth movement? He's classic CIA." I don't have the historical or biographical goods on Jimmy Walter, but this explanation of why he's "a rat" is entirely bullshit. And I know this for a fact, because if I suddenly hit the lottery for $30 million, I guarantee I would spend $20 million of it exactly the way Walter did - getting the 9/11 issue into the papers and on TV any way I could. In this world, would that automatically make me "CIA"?

I have to admit, I'm intrigued by this website, yet it is coming across to me as some sort of bizarre micro-cosm of a micro-managed jealousy-based nitpicking war between Fintan and everybody else who strives for 9/11 Truth. What am I missing? Finton, who do you trust and believe, if it's not simply you? I've enjoyed some of your rants, but if your answer as to who I should consult about 9/11 reality is you and you alone, then thanks for the entertainment, and I'll leave now.

As a side issue, are you aware of a researcher named Chaim Kupferberg, and if so, what is your opinion of him (he asked hesitantly).

"I get the feeling we're all piled in a car that's headed at 100 mph towards a brick wall, and we're all arguing about what seat we get to sit in."

_________________
"No matter what happens, ever... there's ALWAYS at least one reason. And the top reason is ALWAYS money."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
moylan



Joined: 07 Feb 2006
Posts: 104

PostPosted: Sun Feb 12, 2006 7:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

*You* might spend 20 million on resourcing 9-11 "truth" research if you were to win the lottery, but that is not the point. Jimmy Walter did not become a multi-millionaire by winning the lottery, but that is just about the only way anyone is likely to become so without adopting the values of a ruling elite. So someone who has become disgustingly wealthy through availing of tax holidays and payoffs suddenly declaring his interest in seeking the truth about the deceits engaged in by those to whom he owes his position is hardly likely to be honest about his motives, or for that matter honest in his conduct.

To be fair to Fintan, I don't think he is about promoting himself as the one voice of truth as against everyone else in the 9-11 "truth" movement. What he is about is analyzing their arguments and methods. And frankly, if something looks like a Psy-op and smells like a Psy-op, it most likely is one, don't you think? You are not suggesting, I hope, that those who repeat fake stories are somehow too stupid to notice the implications of them? You underestimate them if you do. There's nothing stupid about them or their methods; behind them lies decades of research and experience.

And even if it is true that some of them are dupes, that doesn't excuse them. It's the well-worn excuse of the collaborator.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Phil Howe



Joined: 30 Jan 2006
Posts: 49

PostPosted: Sun Feb 12, 2006 8:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

moylan wrote:
*You* might spend 20 million on resourcing 9-11 "truth" research if you were to win the lottery, but that is not the point. Jimmy Walter did not become a multi-millionaire by winning the lottery, but that is just about the only way anyone is likely to become so without adopting the values of a ruling elite. So someone who has become disgustingly wealthy through availing of tax holidays and payoffs suddenly declaring his interest in seeking the truth about the deceits engaged in by those to whom he owes his position is hardly likely to be honest about his motives, or for that matter honest in his conduct.

To be fair to Fintan, I don't think he is about promoting himself as the one voice of truth as against everyone else in the 9-11 "truth" movement. What he is about is analyzing their arguments and methods. And frankly, if something looks like a Psy-op and smells like a Psy-op, it most likely is one, don't you think? You are not suggesting, I hope, that those who repeat fake stories are somehow too stupid to notice the implications of them? You underestimate them if you do. There's nothing stupid about them or their methods; behind them lies decades of research and experience.

And even if it is true that some of them are dupes, that doesn't excuse them. It's the well-worn excuse of the collaborator.



Moylan your logical falls over almost immediately. The only thing that is clear from your post is that you are envious of the rich because you are not rich, your argument is basically ' any one who is rich cannot be trusted, as if simply by becoming rich a person is no longer morally sympathetic or in fact morally charged at all simply by way of the fact that they 'have more money than you do' ......this is devoid of any sense but absolutely an opinion formed on emotion. The emotion being jealousy, I'm not rich either but that is no reason to hate those that are, if it helps you sleep at night believing all the rich are corrupt then so be it, but lets be honest here, you just want to be a millionare too, and no one can blame you for that Wink

_________________
www.strangeisnotafruit.blogs.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Phil Howe



Joined: 30 Jan 2006
Posts: 49

PostPosted: Sun Feb 12, 2006 8:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rumpl4skn wrote:
Okay, I'm brand new here, as I'm sure you can tell because there's a "1" assigned to this post.

I've listened to a few of Fintan's MP3's. I wholeheartedly agree on his take on the sham that is our 2-party system. I was a bit shocked at this Rat's Nest issue, because a few people I've implicitly been sympathetic to are listed.

Sibel Edmonds is a rat? I know Michael Ruppoert is an ego-maniac, but he's brought a ton of people into the movement. I've read Wayne Madsen and always found him to be a bit odd, but he's NSA? If he's really put up by the NSA I would think his website would look less like it was designed by a kid in 6th grade on a 386 PC in the old Paint app.

In one MP3 Fintan exclaims (paraphrased), "Why would we be suddenly blessed with a millionaire like Jimmy Walter throwing his money into the 9/11 truth movement? He's classic CIA." I don't have the historical or biographical goods on Jimmy Walter, but this explanation of why he's "a rat" is entirely bullshit. And I know this for a fact, because if I suddenly hit the lottery for $30 million, I guarantee I would spend $20 million of it exactly the way Walter did - getting the 9/11 issue into the papers and on TV any way I could. In this world, would that automatically make me "CIA"?

I have to admit, I'm intrigued by this website, yet it is coming across to me as some sort of bizarre micro-cosm of a micro-managed jealousy-based nitpicking war between Fintan and everybody else who strives for 9/11 Truth. What am I missing? Finton, who do you trust and believe, if it's not simply you? I've enjoyed some of your rants, but if your answer as to who I should consult about 9/11 reality is you and you alone, then thanks for the entertainment, and I'll leave now.

As a side issue, are you aware of a researcher named Chaim Kupferberg, and if so, what is your opinion of him (he asked hesitantly).

"I get the feeling we're all piled in a car that's headed at 100 mph towards a brick wall, and we're all arguing about what seat we get to sit in."


Your a smart guy, I like your style and your obvious level of intelligence and common sense. Nice to meet you Smile

_________________
www.strangeisnotafruit.blogs.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
moylan



Joined: 07 Feb 2006
Posts: 104

PostPosted: Sun Feb 12, 2006 9:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well thanks for your concern Phil, but your guesses into what motivates my post aren't very interesting. Yours is a typical intelligence ploy: attack ad hominem, attribute motives, destroy at all costs. I've noticed this tendency of yours before. Frankly, I don't share the same adoration of the rich or aspiration to be wealthy that seems to drive your own attack.

The point is not, contrary to your misrepresentation, that rich=evil. . The point is that these people subscribe to a shared value system. That value system tends to seek its own interests above all else. Not all that complicated, I would have thought. But clearly free invention can turn this into something else.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rumpl4skn



Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Posts: 2950
Location: 36� 3'N x 86�40'W

PostPosted: Sun Feb 12, 2006 12:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

moylan wrote:
*You* might spend 20 million on resourcing 9-11 "truth" research if you were to win the lottery, but that is not the point. Jimmy Walter did not become a multi-millionaire by winning the lottery, but that is just about the only way anyone is likely to become so without adopting the values of a ruling elite. So someone who has become disgustingly wealthy through availing of tax holidays and payoffs suddenly declaring his interest in seeking the truth about the deceits engaged in by those to whom he owes his position is hardly likely to be honest about his motives, or for that matter honest in his conduct.


First off, thank you for the input on this (you're 1 post older than I am) but you're wrong - there are certainly more than 2 ways to become rich. The lottery and being a disgusting, theiving capitalist are not the only two. Some people simply horde money, some work very hard at it, some inherit family wealth, some inherit family businesses, some invent something amazing. Your oversimplification is not helpful. Unless you happen to know Jimmy Walter, and you know for a fact that he's a money-grubbing, pig-handed prole fucker who suddenly turned caring humanitarian overnight, then you might be onto something.

But Fintan's explanation in his rant was useless. Jimmy Walter has alerted a lot of people to 9/11 that wouldn't even have been aware there were anomalies. So, in this world, the CIA has deliberately brought attention to 9/11, through funding Jimmy Walter? I find that hard to buy, I'm sorry. I don't see them as that stupid. I don't think there's an air of inevitability to the issue, as if they knew it would explode, and they simply want it to explode in the correct direction. If they were truly using Walter as a stooge, then his information he pasted up all over the pages of the New York Times would have been less credible. It just doesn't sound logical at all to me.

Those not inclined to believe in the 9/11 scam tend to think of all of us as paranoid, and assumptions along these lines certainly provide ammunition for that description.

I will continue to listen to Fintan's take on things. On some of it, he's brilliant and spot-on. (His dissassembly of the Democrats is exactly my feelings, and I'm a lifer with the Dems.) Some of it I am trying to buy, but it hasn't made enough sense yet. I tend to pick and choose my information agents as "specialists in their field", so I'll continue to tune in.

And we absolutely must be able to discern between the gov't-sponsored disinfo sites and icons and the guys who are really on the side of truth. But my 2nd biggest fear is that the Truth Movement will splinter into factions that can't communicate with each other at all. Who's say that Fintan isn't the disinfo merchant? I don't think he is, but he seems to be doing the most firing of his gun in all directions. It's starting to become the classic sci-fi story where the clone and the real guy both plead that they are the real guy, both screaming, "Shoot him, he's the clone!"

Okay, I didn't expect this to be easy when I "signed on" to uncover the truth. I suppose I must get more info from Fintan and try to figure out exactly what he's talking about. In all fairness, I haven't heard enough to make a real judgement.

Quote:
And frankly, if something looks like a Psy-op and smells like a Psy-op, it most likely is one, don't you think? You are not suggesting, I hope, that those who repeat fake stories are somehow too stupid to notice the implications of them? You underestimate them if you do. There's nothing stupid about them or their methods; behind them lies decades of research and experience.


Well, no - I don't always assume people who deny truth are evil and trying to pull a scam on me. I work with guys who are huge Bush supporters and think the 9/11 anomalies are bullshit. They're not on the government payroll, they're just dumb ass REDNECKS who don't follow anything. They think Arabs sucker-punched us, and Dubya is the "right man for the job", to go indiscriminately kick Arab ass. That's just how they see it in their black and white world, and they'll be the last to believe anything odd went on during the morning of 9/11. But they're not CIA, trust me. Wink

Now, as far as the "fake stories", I assume you are referring to Madsen? I know about the voting check thing, and yes, that made him look bad. Now... are we to assume that because he got something incorrect that he did it purposefully to distract, or is he simply someone who is so eager for attention and scooping the story that he believed some info that he shouldn't have? Are there multiple examples of this behavior? Or is Fintan hanging Wayne out to dry on this one issue (along with him being "ex-NSA". And how true is that. Is it documentable, or does he simply "walk, talk and quack like an NSA agent"? I don't have that info myself.)

I also had a problem with Fintan's assumption that the voting irregularity issue was skirted by deliberate distraction created by people like Madsen talking about an October surprise. Does he mean to say that ordinary citizens would have noticed voting irregularities in the run-up to the election, before the votes were even cast, if we hadn't been distracted by the talk of an October surprise? Or does he mean that the Democrat lawyers who had been dispatched into the Florida and Ohio precincts were so freaked over the October surprise issue that they couldn't concentrate on their jobs?

Sorry, that's beyond ludicrous. I'm fairly ingrained into politics, and I didn't have a legitimate suspicion that there were voting problems until Nov. 3rd when the final tally didn't match the exit polls. So maybe I'm stupid and naive, but I'm certainly the average guy then. Is he saying the average American knew enough about oddities from the 2000 election that they were suspicious of what would happen in 2004? He's giving WAY too much credit to the average voter, my friend. The longest task we have here in the States is going to be convincing Americans that our voting system is broken and being manipulated, trust me.

Anyway.... I enjoy listening, and I'll continue. I'm just not ready for the Fintan t-shirt yet. Cool

_________________
"No matter what happens, ever... there's ALWAYS at least one reason. And the top reason is ALWAYS money."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
Phil Howe



Joined: 30 Jan 2006
Posts: 49

PostPosted: Sun Feb 12, 2006 1:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

moylan wrote:
Well thanks for your concern Phil, but your guesses into what motivates my post aren't very interesting. Yours is a typical intelligence ploy: attack ad hominem, attribute motives, destroy at all costs. I've noticed this tendency of yours before. Frankly, I don't share the same adoration of the rich or aspiration to be wealthy that seems to drive your own attack.

The point is not, contrary to your misrepresentation, that rich=evil. . The point is that these people subscribe to a shared value system. That value system tends to seek its own interests above all else. Not all that complicated, I would have thought. But clearly free invention can turn this into something else.


Firstly please don't start of with the old and tiring suggestion that I am somehow using disinfo 'intelligence ploys' . If someone should constructively criticize your points- which is healthy- responding with cries of 'disinfo agent!!' is about as schoolyard childish as it gets and only reflects badly on you.

Your post reflected a rather flawed suggestion that rich people are immediately not to be trusted just because they have more money than we do, that's just simply jealously, you try and justify not caring about not being rich by believing the rich are 'evil', or at least this is the exact point that came across in your post. ..If I am wrong then that is because you have not articulated your post very well. I am not rich but if I get rich I won't complain about it and I bet you any future millions that you wouldn't either. Certainly I make little effort to obtain millionare status but of course if I could be then cool, what's wrong with being rich?(sure there is a philosophical debate to be had here but this is not the place)

I live in Holland and let me tell you when Jimmy Walters came here he not only took two page full ads out in the daily free newspapers(two papers, 'The Spits' and 'The Metro') that are read by most the commuters of holland on a daily basis(over 1 million people) but he also held open debates and screenings which was VERY positive in raising awareness here, so much so that Dutch prime time tv recently ran a documentary questiong whether the US were involved in 911.....that my friend is progress and that is thanks to Jimmy Walters and is 'european tour', at least in part.

So if you are going to deem a person like Jimmy as somehow not helpful then I expect you to prove it, not simply say' he is rich and therefore not to be trusted', which is essentially what you were saying.

_________________
www.strangeisnotafruit.blogs.com


Last edited by Phil Howe on Sat Feb 25, 2006 12:58 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
moylan



Joined: 07 Feb 2006
Posts: 104

PostPosted: Sun Feb 12, 2006 2:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well if using bad logic is healthy, I obviously went to the wrong school :-)

There's nothing wrong with being rich (hey- you made an argument!) but a lot wrong with how it's done these days. And how it's done these days is pretty much the only way it can be done. That's my problem with philanthropic rich folk. Is that well articulated enough for you?

Yes, here we have a free paper too called "Metro", and it's produced by the British embassy. And when stories start appearing about how 9-11 was a plot carried out by helter-skelter and whoever, one has to start asking questions.

The only Dublin radio station to have mentioned the possibility that 9-11 was "an inside job", or whatever the popular parlance is among 9-11 truth types, was Newstalk 106. And guess who was there to spread the word? Our good friend Alex Jones, spreading his usual disinfo about how Condy knew and Rummy knew and there was a simulation of a terrorist attack involving the hijack of planes that very day, etc. The next time he was on (yes, there was a next time), he was spinning a yarn about how the Pope (previous or present, I forget which) was a member of the Masons. The desired effect was produced: serious questioning of the propaganda line = Alex-Jones- style lunacy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rumpl4skn



Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Posts: 2950
Location: 36� 3'N x 86�40'W

PostPosted: Sun Feb 12, 2006 3:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

moylan wrote:

The only Dublin radio station to have mentioned the possibility that 9-11 was "an inside job", or whatever the popular parlance is among 9-11 truth types, was Newstalk 106. And guess who was there to spread the word? Our good friend Alex Jones, spreading his usual disinfo about how Condy knew and Rummy knew and there was a simulation of a terrorist attack involving the hijack of planes that very day, etc. The next time he was on (yes, there was a next time), he was spinning a yarn about how the Pope (previous or present, I forget which) was a member of the Masons. The desired effect was produced: serious questioning of the propaganda line = Alex-Jones- style lunacy.

Okay, either I'm profoundly stupid or this is preposterous.

Are you actually proposing that Alex Jones is full of shit because Condoleeza Rice and Donald Rumsfeld were not in on the 9/11 plot? Or that there were no terror drills involving plabe hijackings going on the morning of 9/11? The former is conjecture, but the latter is absolutely provebale and on the record.

Please expound on this, I would LOVE to hear the reasoning.

_________________
"No matter what happens, ever... there's ALWAYS at least one reason. And the top reason is ALWAYS money."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
moylan



Joined: 07 Feb 2006
Posts: 104

PostPosted: Sun Feb 12, 2006 9:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The reaction is predictable. Jump on one fact, distort its significance, and mix in a healthy dose of conjecture.

It's what Jones does: play the part of the 9-11 lunatic, running about with a microphone, ranting and raving about illuminati and secret societies in between offering tantalising glimpses of the conspiracy that you wish were true, so that your place as dissatisfied cog can be vindicated.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rumpl4skn



Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Posts: 2950
Location: 36� 3'N x 86�40'W

PostPosted: Sun Feb 12, 2006 10:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

moylan wrote:
The reaction is predictable. Jump on one fact, distort its significance, and mix in a healthy dose of conjecture.

It's what Jones does: play the part of the 9-11 lunatic, running about with a microphone, ranting and raving about illuminati and secret societies in between offering tantalising glimpses of the conspiracy that you wish were true, so that your place as dissatisfied cog can be vindicated.

Im still not following you. You're either much smarter than me, or vice versa, and I'm at a loss as to which is true.

Are you saying that I jumped on one fact in your dissertation about Alex Jones? And then added conjecture?

Anything I "add" is an attempt to figure out what the hell someone is saying. I didn't sign up here to get into arguments, I'm simply seeking information.

But if you're the standard bearer in this forum, moylan, I'm beginning to believe I made a mistake signing up here. What exactly is the purpose of this board? To bring in supporters by sucking them away from other boards? So far I'm unimpressed.

_________________
"No matter what happens, ever... there's ALWAYS at least one reason. And the top reason is ALWAYS money."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
Jerry Fletcher



Joined: 21 Jan 2006
Posts: 837
Location: Studio BS

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 12:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

moylan wrote:

It's what Jones does: play the part of the 9-11 lunatic, running about with a microphone, ranting and raving about illuminati and secret societies in between offering tantalising glimpses of the conspiracy that you wish were true, so that your place as dissatisfied cog can be vindicated.


Nice rant. I feel your frustration - thanks for hanging in there.

Maybe we can pause and focus on the Jones issue a little. I generally agree with moylan's description of Jones; on purpose, misguiding, and ultimately dangerous for intelligent 911 discussion.

Phil and Rumple -
I'm curious to know how you feel about AJ.

Do you think he's accurate?
Is he CIA 'fake'?
Is he a misguided loudmouth?
Do you use Jones as a reference to 'wake up' friends and co-workers?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> General Discussion All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 11, 12, 13 ... 40, 41, 42  Next
Page 12 of 42

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

Theme xand created by spleen.