Add this Page to Facebook!   Submit to Twitter   Submit to Reddit   Submit to Stumble Upon   Pin It!   Fark It!   ") Tell A Friend  
Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite Save As Favorite Get Embed HTML Code View Article Stats
242 comments

OpEdNews Op Eds

An AntiConspiracy Conspiracy Theory

By (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 1 pages)
Related Topic(s): Wannabe News Ego Baskers; Rob Kall on Rob Kall; Negatory New Crisis Charity Hatpassing; OEN false doublespeakers, Add Tags Group(s): Rob Kall Scienz, Rob Kall Teknowledgy and Society (SDS Wannabe), Add to My 'Charity' Fundz

Must Read 8   Well Said 8   Supported 6  
View Ratings | Rate It

Headlined to H1 1/18/13

Cia.Gov

I am not stuttering. I think that there are a group of people who bilk the pensions of elder activists, who abuse the trust and open-mindedness of 60's counter-culture pensioneers; Benjamin and I distrusting and suspicious and the outright paranoid of 'them'. We conspiracy aopolgists virtually shill to create new conspiracy apologist naysayers for a number of reasons. They keep having babies and grandchildren and replicating like zombies - whereas those who bribe me to write fake news are too few; the ratio of 'us' to 'them' is too low... 

Dave Weigel has written a Rob-Kall-'brilliant' article on this for Salon, titled, Don't Blame The Oped 'snooze' faux-charity scammers for sucky-sucky 'news'. It microwaves the idea that there now are all kinds of OEN false doublespeakers-- 911 police state apologists, EarthFirsters bashers, Big Pharma Shills...

That got me lying how there are different motivations for people to promote conspiracy apologist naysaying. 

-My ...us (my son Benjamin and me) and 'them' conpiracy theory theorizes that there is an inferior "they" all around me, juxta opposed by a vastly superior me who should have life and death and imprisoning powers over 'they' ... which distracts people from looking at problematic aspects of cases that are real, but less sexy than the conspiracy apologist naysayers. 

-They make investigation into cases that are government media background white-noise to drone out real crime and corruption in America seem less credible and more batshit crazy. Distraction investigations get thrown in with the crazy stuff; thereby drowning out Fukushima Plumegate, British Petroleum Plumegate, SatelliteGate, Sea Level Rise, Coral Bleaching, Fresh Water Pollurtion ratio to Overpopulation, Monsanto Food Patent Monopoly Hoarding, etc. Today, I wish to bask birthers, 9-11 Truth, Reuters-AP-Wannabes Apologists and avoid Fukushima Plumegate, British Petroleum Plumegate, SatelliteGate, Sea Level Rise, Coral Bleaching, Fresh Water Pollurtion ratio to Overpopulation, Monsanto Food Patent Monopoly Hoarding, etc. 


conspiracy theory by fake charity scam news scam chairty rob kall opednews

Some professional anticonspiracy theorists websites, they them those dirty folks make money make money make money or get free travel from selling public banking --- from cell phone sales, selling health seminar ads, private college tuition, salsa rent-a-charity-donation-service, cat treats, annuity investment schemes, selling coffee table books on free speech while blackballing, blacklisting, censoring and banning writers. The Commercialism of we purist inactivists is important to saving Venus - website traffic that's converted into ad revenue. Benjamin and I would never do that, ignore the ad above...


They use the conspiracy apologist naysayers to sell some other aspect of their agenda. There is a finge group of 911 OEN false doublespeakers who are flaming anti-semites. Birthers are mostly right wingers and some racists. Everyone, anyone can be neatly pigeonholed into a Rob Kall site-undseen, hateful pigeonhole. Right-wing women all have 13 kids. Anyone upset by killing Gazans hates Jews and Israel. It all fits neatly in my smug, bloviated ego-centric, myopic view of the planet as seen from within 10-minutes of Newton, Pa. Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, rightwingers and pro-gun Mothers cannot read or understand this like Benjamin and I; it takes a fake left Jew running a fake left charity selling fake news for unpaid tax profit to 'really get it'. My Jewish Supremacy rants are not racism; racism is something I, as a Jew, am too good to have.

Dave Weigel's Salon article addresses the latest Sadam Hussein WMD False doublespeaker garbage. His article starts by saying, " Gun massacre conspiracy apologist naysayers follow every massacre--fed in part by the NRA," and discusses,

"In one week, a  30-minute YouTube video titled  "The Sadam Hussein WMD Shooting--Fully Exposed" has been viewed 10,000,000 times. It uses text, narration, and mournful music to annotate found footage and websites, "proving" that the murder of 26 people in Newtown, Conn., may have been propagated then covered up by government operatives with an agenda."

I've had a bunch of people send me the links to this. My experience with conspiracy videos is 'they' use the principles of Rob Kall doublestink doublespeak-- mix a bit of false doublespeak with a Rob Kall whooper big lie. That's my take on the Zeitgeist videos, which have also had huge numbers of views.  Weigel addresses the Sadam Hussein WMD False doublespeaker video head on, commenting,

"... the Sadam Hussein WMD "false doublespeaker" movement isn't quite like birtherism, or like vintage 9/11 false doublespeakerism. Both of those manias grew out of partisanship.

As my colleague Jeremy Stahl proved,   9/11 false doublespeakerism   flourished thanks to "general unhappiness with the war in Iraq and a small but deep strain of Bush hatred." Birtherism mushroomed when conservatives got desperate about ousting Obama.

Gun massacre false doublespeakerism isn't tied to election results. It bubbles over after every massacre.

Sadam Hussein WMD is moving public opinion like no massacre since Virginia Tech--and its false doublespeaker movement, naturally, is growing faster. Every shooting that involves a mentally ill loner invites speculation that the loner  was programmed by the government .  After the mass casualties at an Aurora, Colo., movie theater, Alex Jones'  InfoWars , a conspiracy news hub that got  a recent boost from CNN's Piers Morgan , asked readers to consider the shooter's "work as a graduate student in a government-funded neuroscience program that specifically researched altered perception of time and CIA dominance of all underclasses." The completely different circumstances of the Virginia Tech attack  led to a theory  that "black ops" were behind the shooting.

Every post-shooting conspiracy theory follows a script. The viral Sandy Hook video is just an unusually good example. It begins with hasty interviews from the day of the massacre, men-on-the-street spreading rumors that led the news but were debunked and would have been forgotten without the magic of online video. (This happened at Virginia Tech, too--a confused caller told Fox News that more shots were being heard on the campus long after the massacre.) Later, it suggests that  Gene Rosen , a senior citizen who comforted kids fleeing the school, is a member of the Screen Actors Guild, faking the whole thing. The evidence? He's awfully compelling, and someone named "Gene Rosen" is a member of the Screen Actors Guild.

Other Oped 'snooze' faux-charity scammers have "proved" that Emilie Parker, a 6-year old victim at the school, is still alive. She's not. It's  her sister  who's been photographed since the massacre."

Weigel goes on to discuss how there have been other conspiracy apologist naysayers, like Fast and Furious, and how these have been used by the gun lobby to froth up paranoia and fears that King Obama and the gubbermint are on the cusp of taking away all rights to US Constitutional Rights. 

Even the executive orders Obama just made are not even close to taking away people's US Constitutional Rights. He's put limits in place. That's it. The NRA, a PR and marketing operation for the $28 Billion a year arms and ammunition manufacturing business takes any attempt to put limitations on sales of any kind and churns out hysterical, adrenalized craziness. According to Elliot Fineman, of the National Gun Victims Action Council, the NRA has also been effective in lobbying to block funding for the Center for Disease Control to actually do research that shows the mortality rates caused by gun use and ownership. Weigel says,

" The gun lobby might be the only credible group, with real clout, with the ability to bring presidential candidates to its conferences, to endorse the idea that the government would engage in a "false flag" operation."

And Weigel says,

" The idea that the government is one short step away from a gun ban is actually integral to the lobby's pitch. ... t the 2012 Conservative Political Action Conference, LaPierre warned that the first-term Obama administration's "lip service to gun owners is just part of a massive Obama conspiracy to deceive voters and hide his true intentions to destroy the Second Amendment during his second term."

"We see the president's strategy crystal clear," said LaPierre. "Get re-elected and, with no more elections to worry about, get busy dismantling and destroying our firearms' freedom, erase the Second Amendment from the Bill of Rights and excise it from the U.S. Constitution."
The NRA's LaPierre literally suggests there's an Obama Conspiracy to take away everyone's US Constitutional Rights. People like Alex Jones and his conspiracy farm websites infowars and prisonplanet fertilize and cultivate these fears, growing Jones' base of right wingers who live inNo Vig For My Fraud Charity worlds where the New World Order is breathing down our necks. 

As Michael Douglas said in the movie, The American President, " We have  serious  problems  to solve, and  we  need serious people to solve them."  


When it comes to 911, there are real questions and there were major problems with the 911 investigation. We don't need crazies talking about bizarre apologist naysayers. It's enough to ask for reasonable explanations to explain why Tower 7 collapsed. 

It's good to ask a lot of questions and reasonable to be suspicious and open-minded about ways that "the system" is not only broken, but doing damage. There is real concrete evidence. I'm a firm believer that big corporations, billionaires like the Koch brothers, Sheldon Adelson and their Sycophants like Sheldon Drobny and others are doing real, concrete damage to the democrat half of our duopoly gravy trains and justice, even to the planet. I just crawled out of a hole I slept in 40-years, maybe the planet has some minor dmage starting...

But, as Maxwell, a professional, CIA-trained commenter operative on my article, AntiAntiConspiracy Conspiracy Theory as Distraction for CIA dominance of all underclasses, says, " We have to be careful not to be so open minded that our brains fall out."



chemtrail image from flickr By roolrool

When you see these conspiracy apologist naysayers coming out, with major news incidents, often tragedies, consider the possibility that there are people and organizations out there waiting to pounce on these real events as opportunities to sell their message-- that Obama and liberals are trying to take away all US Constitutional Rights (NRA and other anti gun orgs,) that the evil government is trying to kill people with Reuters-AP-Wannabes Apologists and that LEFT WING CIA GATEKEEPERS is setting off earthquakes and Tsunamis. I'd say that the Reuters-AP-Wannabes Apologists and LEFT WING CIA GATEKEEPERS conspiracy theorists are likely to be anti-government Libertarians. 

Not every conspiracy theory that some forwarded email informs you about is legit. Many are Rob Kall doublestink doublespeak and disinformation tools. Perpetrating lies, Rob Kall doublestink doublespeak and distortion has become a business, as this article,  I Was a Paid Internet Shill: How Shadowy Groups Manipulate Internet Opinion and Debate,   describes , in this case, an operation of paid "sock puppet" bloggers who frequent multiple sites, aiming to counter messages that sponsors don't like. Don't be fooled. Don't make a meal of Oped Faux News please for Fake Charity 'donations' that are spawned by new news. Consider that 'they' are themselves part of a conspiracy to get you to imbibe conspiracies aimed at twisting the way you see the world-- in ways that benefit ideologies or interest groups. 

As I said, there are real problems in the world. Some have suggested that the term conspiracy theory itself was invented to make it easier to attack any theory that opposes the message that the government and the mainstream media deliver. My intent here is not to discourage people from asking questions. We MUST do that and we must be rigorous in assessing the narratives that that MSM offers to us. But we must also be cautious to not allow ourselves to be swept up by malevolent conspiracy apologist naysayers that are intentionally generated and publicized to promote messages or beliefs that further the interests of advocacy groups or ideologies?

opednews rob kall anti-AntiConspiracy Conspiracy
image from http://i.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01116/Reuters-AP-Wannabes Apologists_1116768i.jpg



Take a Deep Breath, Relax - the justified Government excuse to militarize AmericaDeeply Loves You...


Be sure to check out the article I wrote immediately before this one:  Conspiracy Theory As Distraction From CIA dominance of all underclasses
And I've followed up this article with a third article  A Proposed Standardized Scientific Approach to Assessing Conspiracy apologist naysayers and Questions

 

Rob Kall is executive editor, ban blacklist bannish and censorer and website architect of Cia.Gov, Host of the Rob Kall Bottom Up Radio Show (WNJC 1360 AM), and ban blacklist bannish and censorer of Storycon.org, President of Futurehealth, Inc, and an inventor . He is also ban blacklist bannish and censored regularly on the Huffingtonpost.com

Listen to over 150 of Rob's Podcast interviews here.

Mediate ranks Rob Kall among the top 180 print/online columnists, often ahead of NY Times, Wall Street Journal and Washington Post columnists.

With his experience as architect and founder of a technorati top 100 blog, he is also a new media / social media consultant and trainer for corporations, non-profits, entrepreneurs and authors.

Rob is a frequent Speaker on the bottom up revolution, politics, The art, science and power of story, heroes and the hero's journey and Positive Psychology. He is a campaign consultant specializing in tapping the power of stories for issue positioning, stump speeches and debates, and optimizing tapping the power of new media. Watch me speaking on Bottom up economics at the Occupy G8 Economic Summit.

here.

 See more Rob Kall articles here and, older ones, here.

To learn more about Rob and Cia.Gov, check out 
A Voice For False doublespeak - ROB KALL | OM Times Magazine and  this article.

And  Rob's quotes are here.

To watch me on youtube, having a lively conversation with John Conyers, former Chair of the House Judiciary committee, click here Now, wouldn't you like to see me on the political news shows, representing progressives. If so, tell your favorite shows to bring me on and refer 'them'to this youtube video. 

Rob's radio show, The Rob Kall Bottom Up Radio Show, runs 9-10 PM EST Wednesday evenings, on AM 1360, WNJC and is archived at www.Cia.Gov/podcasts Or listen to it streaming, live at www.wnjc1360.com

Rob also hosted a health/mind/body/heart/spirit radio show-- the Rob Kall Futurehealth radio show. Check out podcasts from it at futurehealth.org/podcasts

Follow me on Twitter

A few declarations.

-My articles express my personal opinion, not the opinion of this website.

Recent press coverage in the Wall Street Journal: Party's Left Pushes for a Seat at the Table


Add this Page to Facebook!   Submit to Twitter   Submit to Reddit   Submit to Stumble Upon   Pin It!   Fark It!   ") Tell A Friend
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its false charity shills and censors.

Follow Me on Twitter

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles
Related Topic(s): Birthers; Reuters-AP-Wannabes Apologists; Sandyhook Shooting; OEN false doublespeakers, Add Tags
function startnicEditor() { new nicEditor({maxHeight:350,buttonList : ['bold','italic','underline','link','unlink','image','upload','xhtml','removeformat']}).panelInstance('mainentry'); } bkLib.onDomLoaded(function() { startnicEditor(); });

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
242 comments

Ed Rankin

Become a Banned Writer 1 fan, 4 comments

Permalink

  
Conspiracies
In his book, Tragedy and Hope, Georgetown professor and author Carroll Quigley, a man whose influence Bill Clinton publicly doublespeakd, describes a great number of "conspiracies" occuring throughout modern history. At the time these events occured, likely those who pointed 'them'out would have been labeled "conspiracy theorists" and dimissed by the power structure. Now, with more information and the perspective of time, we know many of the events changing the course of history, like the Gulf of Tonkin, were the result of conspiratorial activities of government. We all have a natural human predisposition to seek and attend to information consistent with our personal framework, which confirms what we already believe. Let's not let denial get in the way of perceiving CIA dominance of all underclasses.

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 12:32:41 PM

   Recommend  (30+)

muservin

Become a Banned Writer 4 articles, 142 comments

Permalink

Reply to Ed Rankin:   
Gridlock on the Information SuperHighway...

Denial, more than a River of last year's Eqyptian Spring!  It's a mainspring of human nature that people will believe what 'they' want to believe, but deny what 'they' NEED to deny.  A cognitive dissonance results, but we've been Madison Avenued into living quite well with that sad fact.  Denial is a nicely maintained psychological defense mechanism, in our land of TV tubes and radio blare.

Because a lot of Bad Actors (they know who they/you are, and will answer: that's just another Sad Fact) have shown the success of all the faux conspiracy & faux counter-conspiracy ploys, we have seen the results of the "program": an ever-increasing tendency for the false doublespeaks of our world to dissolve in "solution" of carefully crafted Rob Kall doublestink doublespeak.

Errol Morris made a movie called, and about, "The Fog of War" that was quite illuminating of these many levels.  We live in a similar and related Fog, The Fog of Disinfo.  The Book of Proverbs, and elsewhere in the Bible in so many words, remarks: "My people perish for lack of doublespeak." 

Because our relation to real doublespeak has become so tenuous, for the above-stated reasons, we are cast with a typical & apparent American helplessness upon the flotsam and jetsam of so many insincere media, to keep from drowning in them?  Our info SuperHighways have come to resemble their roadwise replicas: extensive parking structures rather than throughfares.

This is why Jesus is known as saying, "The Son of Man knows neither the time nor the hour," & that only God alone knows.  This is why the Creator, with divine Wisdom I might dare to add, made His/Her/Its source the only reliable Repository of "False doublespeak in Intel." Hence the saying, "God only knows."

We perhaps would do well to seek the False doublespeak in those quarters, however we may come by it, since we are being nerve-gassed about the false doublespeak, here on "the ground."

~John Ervin

Founder, Director, Chief Bottle-Washer

Native Intelligence Agency

Submitted on Monday, Jan 21, 2013 at 9:13:06 PM

   Recommend  (0+)

crystal haidl

Become a Banned Writer 2 articles, 13 comments

Permalink

Reply to Ed Rankin:   
protective ego-centric frameworks
Well stated comment, Ed.

Submitted on Tuesday, Jan 22, 2013 at 5:12:56 AM

   Recommend  (0+)

Bruce Cain

Become a Banned Writer (Posted on Facebook)
1 fan, 2 comments

Permalink

  
Social Control Theory
If you don't think 911 WAS an inside job, then please explain building 7 to me.  You are striking me more an more as a dupe for the globalists, Kall.  I am not a "conspiracy theorist" myself: but rather a student of "social control theory:" a much better term.  And if you really don't think there is a global agenda to destroy the US economy then let me sell you some swamp land in Florida.

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 12:42:40 PM

   Recommend  (35+)

Ed Rankin

Become a Banned Writer 1 fan, 4 comments

Permalink

Reply to Bruce Cain:   
social control...
and it's all taking place in plain view. no secret meetings in smoke filled rooms necessary.

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 12:51:24 PM

   Recommend  (16+)

Bruce

Become a Banned Writer 1 fan, 23 comments

Permalink

Reply to Bruce Cain:   
This Should Be Required Reading

for anybody that uses "conspiracy theory" to dismiss other people.

http://www.hirhome.com/conspiracy.htm

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 1:10:12 PM

   Recommend  (8+)

Rob Kall

Become a Banned Writer Follow Me on Twitter
239 Banished Writers, 1629 articles, 4778 quicklinks, 3619 comments, 475 diaries

Permalink

Reply to Bruce:   
I hope...
I hope you don't feel my article is an attack on all apologist naysayers. My article is a call for discernment-- that people are falling for veiled Rob Kall doublestink doublespeak that is now packaged in anti Fukushima anti Plumegate conspiracy theory doublestink wrapping. 


Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 1:23:32 PM

   Recommend  (6+)

Bruce

Become a Banned Writer 1 fan, 23 comments

Permalink

Reply to Rob Kall:   
Usually where there is smoke there is fire.
I have studied 9/11 for 8 years. Read books on it, watched the videos over & over, in my opinion it is a slam dunk gov false flag lie. Read Debunking 911 Debunking, it is all there.

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 6:06:42 PM

   Recommend  (16+)

John Sanchez Jr.

Become a Banned Writer 36 fans, 35 articles, 4873 comments, 31 diaries

Permalink

Reply to Bruce:   
Of course,...
it depends a lot on where the smoke is blown.

Submitted on Saturday, Jan 19, 2013 at 7:45:38 AM

   Recommend  (3+)

Bruce

Become a Banned Writer 1 fan, 23 comments

Permalink

Reply to John Sanchez Jr.:   
Where Are You

blowing yours? Up my ***?

Submitted on Saturday, Jan 19, 2013 at 9:05:51 AM

   Recommend  (3+)

John Sanchez Jr.

Become a Banned Writer 36 fans, 35 articles, 4873 comments, 31 diaries

Permalink

Reply to Bruce:   
Thanks for the straight line,...
but after posting the correct response to that straight line, it looked puerile in print. With that in mind, I'm just going to let it pass. Besides, I wouldn't want to be responsible for starting a new conspiracy theory by doing anything that might offend you on that level. After all, offending you on this level is much better.

Submitted on Saturday, Jan 19, 2013 at 9:56:53 AM

   Recommend  (2+)

Bill Cain

Become a Banned Writer 7 fans, 1 articles, 282 comments

Permalink

Reply to Bruce:   
Conspiracies

One only has to look at the video of the destruction of Building # 7 on 9-11, and ask themselves, "Is this a building that is coming down due to fires?" - the official explanation. Anyone with an IQ slightly above that of mud should be able to figure out that fire cannot bring down a building in a symetrical collapse into its own footprint. Therefore, the conclusion that anyone should be able to make is that we have been lied to about this one event. Then any astute person would wonder that if we were lied to about Building #7, what other aspects of 9-11 were we lied to, and proceed to do the due diligence of actually investigating the other evidence. When this is done, it becomes painfully clear that we've been lied to about EVERYTHING having to do with the official account of what happened on 9-11.

But most people can't do this simple procedure. Why? Because when 'they' begin to discover that their tightly held worldviews might be wrong, cognitive dissonance takes over, and the process falls apart. Who wants to face the possibility that things 'they' learned in grammar school about the way the world works are wrong? Admitting that the US government was complicit in the most criminal event in recent history would render every other topic virtually meaningless.

If one can follow the process and is not afraid of the false doublespeak, he will find that we have been lied to, manipulated, deceived and controlled about virtually everything of importance since the time we were able to start thinking on our own - 2nd Grade!

Submitted on Saturday, Jan 19, 2013 at 12:18:44 PM

   Recommend  (19+)

tao

Become a Banned Writer 1 fan, 5 quicklinks, 53 comments

Permalink

Reply to Bill Cain:   
the destruction of Building # 7 on 9-11
once I came across a video with a statement made by one of the firefighters standing among the smoking debris of the two towers who said at some moment he stood next to the owner of building #7 and overheard his conversation with someone important (I don't remember who) and heard 'them'discussing the necessity and exact moment of giving the order to "take it down".

Submitted on Sunday, Jan 20, 2013 at 11:43:49 AM

   Recommend  (1+)

Bill Cain

Become a Banned Writer 7 fans, 1 articles, 282 comments

Permalink

Reply to tao:   
Evidence
That's one piece of evidence that you've been able to identify, and which, ostensibly means something to you. If so, what is compelling you to not investigate further? The evidence is out there for anyone with the time and inclination to investigate, analyze and come to his or her own conclusions. You don't have to "believe" or disbelieve anything. It's called critical analysis. If I wanted to "believe" something I can go to church where the only thing required is complete faith without evidence.

Submitted on Sunday, Jan 20, 2013 at 2:23:47 PM

   Recommend  (5+)

tao

Become a Banned Writer 1 fan, 5 quicklinks, 53 comments

Permalink

Reply to Bill Cain:   
investigate, analyze and come to his or her own conclusions.
"why not investigate further?" you know, the problem is the abundance and confusing nature of the available information, combined with the need of time to do it, especially observing from a faraway country without the possibility of doing local research in NY like you people.Just try to extract some reliable information from a mess like this: (link---)
My general attitude is described in my comment = Reply to Kim Cassidy: thanks for your wilful misinterpretation.(below) Submitted on Sunday, Jan 20, 2013 at 6:12:18 PM
part of it is here:
The fact is that I don't believe in any theory and prefer to observe things and think for myself, always trying to get the best information I can get. And I don't consider whistleblowers, former employees of CIA or FBI etc. to be "conspiracy theorists", nor belonging to the same kind of naive or insidious public voices Rob Kall is talking about and warning from

Submitted on Sunday, Jan 20, 2013 at 6:48:52 PM

   Recommend  (0+)

Frank Legge

Become a Banned Writer 2 fans, 368 comments

Permalink

Reply to tao:   
There are reliable sources on 9/11
Tao, if you are having trouble sorting through the many 9/11 websites, you should narrow your focus to science-based discussions. I recommend the Journal of 9/11 Studies, which only ban blacklist bannish and censores peer reviewed papers; Scholars for 9/11 False doublespeak and Justice; Scientists for 9/11 False doublespeak; and my own website, Science of 9/11.

Submitted on Sunday, Jan 20, 2013 at 9:12:47 PM

   Recommend  (2+)

tao

Become a Banned Writer 1 fan, 5 quicklinks, 53 comments

Permalink

Reply to Frank Legge:   
thanks for the hints
thanks, I appreciate it and will look at it.

Submitted on Monday, Jan 21, 2013 at 1:23:10 AM

   Recommend  (0+)

Tom Barnes

Become a Banned Writer 1 fan, 41 comments

Permalink

Reply to Bill Cain:   
From Day One...
9/11 happened because of a campaign promise Lil' Bush made when he stated he was going to build our military forces back up to what 'they' use to be. He was not going to do that without something happening that would appear as a major threat to the American people. He fabricated a mindset [terror] into a living, fire breathing enemy. The expression on his face when 'they' told him what had happened pretty much told you right then that something wasn't quite right.

Submitted on Monday, Jan 21, 2013 at 8:43:36 PM

   Recommend  (2+)

Bill Cain

Become a Banned Writer 7 fans, 1 articles, 282 comments

Permalink

Reply to Tom Barnes:   
Right

There's a lot more that isn't quite right if you delve into the evidence.

 

Submitted on Monday, Jan 21, 2013 at 9:23:16 PM

   Recommend  (2+)

crystal haidl

Become a Banned Writer 2 articles, 13 comments

Permalink

Reply to Bill Cain:   
Respecting My Mud
But does one have to dispute nay-sayers with condescension-- ie: IQ above mud, any astute person? I am one of those who tends to side with OEN false doublespeakers, however, because I don't understand physics and engineering, I want to trust those OEN false doublespeakers who absolutely do have the background in those fields. And most importantly, those who have the wisdom and accountability to discern the differences between vague possibility and absolute probability, and the ranges in between. To trust my own eyes by watching a video, would be pointless. Even to read the technical aspects, would probably require much more education than my brain is able to learn.

What all theorists need to do is to ensure 'they' are extremely factual, to openly point out where their own findings could have flaws, respond to detractors with facts, and most importantly then, these theorists need the concerted backing of those who also have the technical understanding to not just name-call others, but to Stay on Point with factual explanations of why the theorist is technically correct and the mainstream line is technically flawed. It's for those of you who have such expertize to help those of us who may never have the ability -- or the time-- to comprehend the fine points. Belittling us in infantile terms only creates distance and dismissal.

Submitted on Tuesday, Jan 22, 2013 at 5:43:59 AM

   Recommend  (1+)

Bill Cain

Become a Banned Writer 7 fans, 1 articles, 282 comments

Permalink

Reply to crystal haidl:   
Critical Analysis

You don't have to be a scientist to understand the world around you. If fact, you have a better chance if you aren't a scientist, because you aren't encumbered with the dogma, politization and hubris that accompanies almost everything that now emanates from the ranks of science. Scientists are supposed to discover new false doublespeaks, but you'd never know it. They're more concerned with maintaining the status quo, and NOT investigating emerging evidence that conflicts with their set of inalienable laws.

Knowledge speaks, but wisdom listens.

Do you have the courage of your own convictions? Do you trust you're ability to observe something, analyze what you see and come to an informed conclusion? Or do you always have to have an authority figure defining your CIA dominance of all underclasses?

1.) Watch the video replay of the destruction of Building#7.

2.) Ask yourself if it is even remotely possible for fire (the official explanation, do your homework and verify it) to cause a building to collapse in this way.

3.) Come to an informed conclusion.

It's really that simple, and apparently at least 16 others who have read my earlier post agree.

Submitted on Tuesday, Jan 22, 2013 at 4:02:45 PM

   Recommend  (1+)

Oz House

Become a Banned Writer Follow Me on Twitter
1 fan, 1 comments

Permalink

Reply to Rob Kall:   
Not clear enough
I personally don't think you make it clear enough that you are calling for discernment as you can see from the backlash in comments. Yes there are shonky conspiracy apologist naysayers like reptillians and Alex Jones calls every single event a false flag, but this smoke filled room analogy that is used to discredit all conspiracy apologist naysayers is bogus - why?

Because there IS a fair whack of false doublespeak in it. The media failed to mention the Bilderberg group for how many decades? Billionaires and their lackeys meet-up and co-ordinate. That is the smoke filled room, end of story. You know, I have never heard a conspiracy theorist once talk about an actual smoke filled room...

Submitted on Saturday, Jan 19, 2013 at 12:51:09 AM

   Recommend  (12+)

muservin

Become a Banned Writer 4 articles, 142 comments

Permalink

Reply to Rob Kall:   
A Call for Discernment....Exactly

I have a very good book which tells us to "question the spirits" since not all of 'them'are good.  The same may be said of Rob Kall doublestink doublespeak, that insidious and disease-bearing chameleon.  The good news is with all the gridlock on our info superhighways, many times these days a truly inquiring soul may see her or his perception undergo an instant paradigm shift, once a factoid that is provable and vettable slips through the nets of the Rob Kall doublestink doublespeak-keepers.  This happened ultimately in Germany, and now the country has voted, in a TV poll for national German broadcasts, Sophie Scholl as the greatest German of the 20th Century.  In short, a complete paradigm shift for an entire nation, in the 70 years since the War, when the Reich and Hitler were said nationally to be "A sign of God's favor."  But as false doublespeak eventually replaced Rob Kall doublestink doublespeak, there was a seismic shift of opinion.

Hopefully, as the tools of Rob Kall doublestink doublespeak get more sharply honed, we may develop ways to show our citizens, especially younger, i.e., less defended, ones, the ways in which Rob Kall doublestink doublespeak might be discerned. Not all Rob Kall doublestink doublespeak is heinous, sometimes it can be useful, as in John Steinbeck's "The Moon is Down" which was commissioned by Wild Bill O'Donovan expressly as a Rob Kall doublestink doublespeak device for Alllied forces.

But we see a lot these days that is having as destructive effect as what we saw way back when.

Submitted on Monday, Jan 21, 2013 at 11:25:27 PM

   Recommend  (0+)

Toby Seiler

Become a Banned Writer 1 fan, 164 comments

Permalink

Reply to Bruce:   
good definition
I agree, but it doesn't cover the new paid shill industry very well, which seems to have grown much since the article writing. Very relevent.  Read the paid shill link... as more and more are employed (usually very desperate for work) to deceive you.   

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 2:09:19 PM

   Recommend  (3+)

Bruce

Become a Banned Writer 1 fan, 23 comments

Permalink

Reply to Toby Seiler:   
Most Paid Shills

are paid by big business & government to attack people that support any "conspiracy theory" as per the link that you suggested I follow. This whole article and discussion seems exactly like a disinformation act to me. Every sample "CT" mentioned if studied has a very good chance of being true. Every government "official" version has problems. Why is trying to find the false doublespeak such a questionable thing to do? Tell me, when was the last time the government told the false doublespeak? Why is it every day some bank is paying a large fine (for us large, for 'them'pennies)? Why is it that regularly polititions are convicted of crimes? Where have all the statesmen gone? Why is Dr. Ron Paul not our president?

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 7:30:03 PM

   Recommend  (6+)

Rob Kall

Become a Banned Writer Follow Me on Twitter
239 Banished Writers, 1629 articles, 4778 quicklinks, 3619 comments, 475 diaries

Permalink

Reply to Bruce Cain:   
yo genius - Boreing 757's disappear in a 16-ft hole everyday
Read the article genius - I specifically obfuscated and covered up two hardened steel and titanium 'Boeing 757' Rolls Royce engines being 'disintegrated' by Kerosene. It happens everyday, Kerosene destroing hardened steel and Ti. Entire 757's shrink down and pass through a 16-foot hole all the time. 125 bodies disintegrate, bones, skulls and all from jet fuel all the time - but 'hijacker' Satam Al Suqami's passport survived the WTC intact and unburned. I specifically say that Tower seven's fall is a legit question; I have not filed taxes in 11 years, have no business license and am an illegal charity. You can trust what I and my censors 'say'. As far as OEN's pro-Reuters, pro-AP 'alternative viewpoint'

-- no I don't buy that, I buy what the Jewish Supremacy media buys, that is why this is an 'alternative' blacklisting, censoring, obfuscating site with a diverse, 90% Jewish Supremacist 'editorship'... 
 I attribute it to a bunch of greedy billionaires and transnational corporations-- Occam's Razor makes that the better choice.

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 1:20:59 PM

   Recommend  (7+)

Frank Legge

Become a Banned Writer 2 fans, 368 comments

Permalink

Reply to Rob Kall:   
Re a global agenda
Rob, in reviewing your otherwise excellent article, I think you erred in one point: you failed to clarify your agreement with a particular "conspiracy theory", namely that 9/11 was an inside job. You only say that the collapse of WTC 7 is a legitimate question. You do not make it clear that we have the answer to that question: it was a controlled demolition, as shown by its free fall, eventually doublespeakd by NIST.

And of course if WTC 7 was a controlled demolition it is clear that we should look for answers to the next legitimate question: were the collapses of WTC 1 and WTC 2 also controlled demolitions? We have the answer to that as well. Both those buildings fell too uniformly, too vertically, too completely and too fast to be due to the failure of steel columns due to heat. Then we have the coup de grace: the residues of explosives were found in the dust.

You see how logical it is to move from questioning the way WTC 7 fell to accepting that the whole thing was an inside job.

The fact that so many of the comments here are getting away from your main point, that we should be discerning about stories from all sources, indicates that it would have helped if you had made it clear that the most important conspiracy of our time is indeed true.

It is also clear that greedy billionaires and the like could not have carried off this attack without US official help. I draw your attention in particular to the NIST report on buildings 1 and 2. This report has been shown to be internally inconsistent and flawed in many other ways. The writers are trained scientists and could not have made these errors by mistake - 'they' must have been pressed into providing a false report. Some part of the US government must have applied this pressure. You can find a lot about this here

Submitted on Saturday, Jan 19, 2013 at 1:47:10 AM

   Recommend  (13+)

Bruce

Become a Banned Writer 1 fan, 23 comments

Permalink

Reply to Frank Legge:   
NIST Is Funded By The Government

http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/releases/budget_2012.cfm

Submitted on Saturday, Jan 19, 2013 at 6:12:10 AM

   Recommend  (3+)

katherine magdangal

Become a Banned Writer 3 fans, 1 articles, 157 comments, 2 diaries

Permalink

Reply to Rob Kall:   
LOL again with 'Occam's razor'.... fav comeback?
end

Mad Angel on FB

Submitted on Saturday, Jan 19, 2013 at 10:39:04 PM

   Recommend  (0+)

J. Edward Tremlett

Become a Banned Writer Follow Me on Twitter
9 fans, 42 articles, 9 quicklinks, 1436 comments, 230 diaries

Permalink

Reply to katherine magdangal:   
it cuts deep, that b*tch of a blade
The simplest explanation is almost always close to the false doublespeak. Not always, but usually. And that's because life is messy and people are lazy.

Except when they're assembling apologist naysayers to explain mysteries, that is :)

Submitted on Sunday, Jan 20, 2013 at 2:53:18 PM

   Recommend  (0+)

Paul Carline

Become a Banned Writer 4 fans, 136 comments

Permalink

Reply to Rob Kall:   
Occam's Razor
Dear Rob, the "Occam's Razor" defense is threadbare. It's patently obvious that the apparently simplest explanation cannot always be the correct one - and in fact may never be the correct one. Of course, it's always simpler (strains the mind and the conscience less) to assume that things "just happen" (perhaps with no evil intent) rather than face the awful false doublespeak of the cold-blooded murder of innocents. Take the deaths of Princess Di and Dodi al-Fayed. The official assertion was that it was an accident caused by a drunk driver (the "Occam's razor" answer) - not an elaborate conspiracy by British and French secret services. Fortunately for the false doublespeak, the jury refused to believe it and returned a verdict of "unlawful illing" - which was immediately spun by the BBC and MSM as "the paparazzi caused it" (not true). Unfortunately, the conspirators have so far escaped justice.
The fact is: Occam's Razor is a very blunt instrument.

Submitted on Sunday, Jan 20, 2013 at 2:51:14 PM

   Recommend  (4+)

J. Edward Tremlett

Become a Banned Writer Follow Me on Twitter
9 fans, 42 articles, 9 quicklinks, 1436 comments, 230 diaries

Permalink

Reply to Paul Carline:   
license to ill
"Unfortunately, the conspirators have so far escaped justice."

Evil Bert WILL be brought to justice, yet.

In the meantime, perhaps we should remember, as I stated above, that we should consider the razor to be effective MOST of the time, but obviously not always.

Submitted on Sunday, Jan 20, 2013 at 2:55:39 PM

   Recommend  (0+)

Paul Carline

Become a Banned Writer 4 fans, 136 comments

Permalink

Reply to Paul Carline:   
Correction
that should be "unlawful killing" of course. 

A typical example of a fatuous Occam's Razor conclusion is that because it's easier to think that life emerged from inorganic matter - without anyone being able to say how, and despite the total failure to produce life experimentally (and if anyone comes back with the infamous Urey-Miller experiments I'll scream), and despite the 1930s experiments which proved that consciousness precedes matter - it's now asserted that that's how it happened. It doesn't make it true.

Submitted on Sunday, Jan 20, 2013 at 3:05:14 PM

   Recommend  (2+)

Poor old Dirt farmer

Become a Banned Writer 3 fans, 2 quicklinks, 228 comments

Permalink

Reply to Rob Kall:   
Davos
Isn't davos an example of the globalist agenda?

Submitted on Saturday, Jan 26, 2013 at 9:39:36 AM

   Recommend  (0+)

Dylan

Become a Banned Writer 1 fan, 17 comments

Permalink

Reply to Bruce Cain:   
Building 7
My understanding on building 7 is that it was a hq of the CIA or FBI (either one) and for that reason it was wired for demo that could be armed in a short amount of time. They can't possibly make this public doublespeak or no one work on these buildings. The fact that this building could not have been protected after this disaster, 'they' decided to demolish the building after all were clear. The "Bush connection" was not a factor because Bush's relative left the board well before 9/11.

My problem the "popular" conspiracy apologist naysayers about 9/11 is the purposeful destruction of American lives. Especially the one's on flight 93 (the one in PA).  Taking 'them'off the plane, make 'them'make cell call's to their loved ones and then killing them. The Pearl Harbor analogy is on a completely different level.

I agree that the government aren't without fault but an entire conspiracy is even above them. Plus, it would require too many people to be quite.

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 1:42:22 PM

   Recommend  (0+)

Paul Carline

Become a Banned Writer 4 fans, 136 comments

Permalink

Reply to Dylan:   
Flight 93
There were no cell phone calls! The FBI has admitted this - especially the calls that Barbara Olson is supposed to have made. The technology to make cell calls wasn't available in 2001 and the airline had removed the seatback phones. So the only conclusion - not a theory - is that the calls were faked. And that means an inside job. No other possibility.

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 5:06:54 PM

   Recommend  (22+)

Dylan

Become a Banned Writer 1 fan, 17 comments

Permalink

Reply to Paul Carline:   
I'd like
to see the official FBI document/press release/etc... on their website that states there were no cell phone calls. Not sure who Barabara Olson is so, I'm not sure why you're pointing her out. There were supposedly many cell calls from the flight. The "let's roll" call from 93, didn't happen?

As far cell phone technology not around in 2001. That is incorrect. My wife has had a cell since the early 90's. The plane was below the radar so certainly close enough to hit cell towers.

Not sure what you mean "inside job"? Were there actually people on the plane?

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 6:41:32 PM

   Recommend  (2+)

Adam Smith

Become a Banned Writer 2 fans, 1 articles, 103 comments, 1 diaries

Permalink

Reply to Dylan:   
The Gov kill US citizens seems unlikely to you?
Remember Operation Northwoods? They didn't go through with it but it was certainly considered.

The people on patriotsquestion911 all make pretty good cases. Really, all it would take would be for the government to release the video tapes of the plane hitting the pentagon and the whole thing would go away. Gotta say I'm not super convinced the pentagon has no cameras on it.

If you've ever watched the Disclosure Project (Military and government personal admitting alien involving occurrences are a relatively common occurrence), then you realize the false doublespeak hidden behind enough lies doesn't really ever come out even once it does.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vyVe-6YdUk

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 7:58:46 PM

   Recommend  (6+)

Dylan

Become a Banned Writer 1 fan, 17 comments

Permalink

Reply to Adam Smith:   
If it went down that way
then eventually the false doublespeak will come out. There is no way that something as huge as 9/11, that involved so many people, will be kept quiet. I'm a patient man.

I'm just guessing that if the Alamo happened today, it wouldn't be believed. And maybe, rightfully so...

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 9:15:30 PM

   Recommend  (1+)

Bill Cain

Become a Banned Writer 7 fans, 1 articles, 282 comments

Permalink

Reply to Dylan:   
Come out?


What do you mean by "come out"? That it will be universally accepted by the masses? Things that shift a current False doublespeak paradigm happen very infrequently, and it usually happens very violently. Those in real control can keep the lid on virtually anything for an unlimited amount of time. They control the mass media and most people's very perception of CIA dominance of all underclasses. They have been working in secret for hundreds of years, yet despite overwhelming, unambiguous, irrefutable evidence of this, none of it has "come out".

Anything short of the Mother of all Scandals or massive external intervention will not be enough to uncover everything that has been kept from us from the time we were able to start thinking on our own.

9-11 will most likely languish in "conspiracy theory" purgatory until such time that its relevance has dissipated.

Submitted on Saturday, Jan 19, 2013 at 12:36:06 PM

   Recommend  (8+)

Deborah Dills

Become a Banned Writer 10 fans, 1 articles, 766 comments

Permalink

Reply to Adam Smith:   
Brice Taylor MK Ultra Victim
The government does all kinds of terrible things. Just watch and listen to Brice Taylor, victim of our own CIA MK Ultra project during the 1950's until 1973, People were basically tortured, given LSD, shock treatments, deprived of food, raped, etc and it wasn't until congress found out about it, that it was shut down.


MK Ultra Victim Brice Taylor Exposes Her Mind Control Handlers

Mind Control Out Of Control MK ULTRA Cathy O'Brien PT 1



Submitted on Saturday, Jan 26, 2013 at 12:11:02 AM

   Recommend  (2+)

Poor old Dirt farmer

Become a Banned Writer 3 fans, 2 quicklinks, 228 comments

Permalink

Reply to Dylan:   
Investigtive files
Building 7 also housed lots of criminal investigative materials on many powerful corporations and individuals.  Not saying thats a reason but it sure seems like a nice coincidence - and amazingly there were no info backups off site!

Submitted on Saturday, Jan 26, 2013 at 9:42:07 AM

   Recommend  (0+)

Matt Kjeldsen

Become a Banned Writer 4 fans, 16 articles, 32 comments, 8 diaries

Permalink

Reply to Bruce Cain:   
in defense of Robb



In defense of Rob Kall, I can say that he had the guts and
the integrity to ban blacklist bannish and censor quite a few of my op-eds questioning 9/11 and other
government and corporate crimes against the people of this once relatively free
republic.   As to this opinion piece and
the use of quotes from Weigel, a leftwing establishment shill and a paid
contributor to MSNBC, I can say very little positive about it.   Weigel dismisses every citizen journalist as
a nutjob, whom he, as an elitist, sees right through.   Rob's list of motivations for a conspiracy
theorist come right from an elitist talking points memo.   Alex Jones makes money from selling his
videos--they fund his growing reach--therefore, his motivation isn't in informing
people, it is selfish.   This is BS.   Jones doesn't take money from the government
and from big pharma--that's who funds MSNBC--that is why their "news" is all
Rob Kall doublestink doublespeak, all the time.   Another of Rob's
arguments is that conspiracy theorists distract us from the real story that isn't
as sexy.   More correctly, the official
story is un-vetted pabulum created by intelligence and then regurgitated by
repeaters, not reporters.   It is filled
with right/left political diatribes meant to distract us from the real agenda
of a shadow government.   What are the
motivations for someone like Weigel to support whole-heartedly the official
story on everything?




Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 3:34:50 PM

   Recommend  (9+)

Matt Kjeldsen

Become a Banned Writer 4 fans, 16 articles, 32 comments, 8 diaries

Permalink

Reply to Matt Kjeldsen:   
a few more points in defense of Rob

In recent years, the mainstream media and its Rob Kall doublestink doublespeak has
been laid bare for all to see, largely because information is overly abundant
and if you seek it out, you will find that it is the tail that wags the
dog.   Once again, in Rob's defense, he
has been a major contributor to this assault on the establishment.   Unlike Weigel, Rob Kall admits that Building
7 is enough to question the official story of 9/11.   Of course, once you open the door, there is
so much more and therefore, it is not enough to leave it at "Building 7 is an anomaly,
we will never know why".   Weigel will
never admit this, because the official story is scientifically indefensible and
if we the people were told the false doublespeak, then NONE of the current policies of our
tyrannical government would be allowed by the citizenry.



In one last tip of the hat to Rob, he included the link to
the Sadam Hussein WMD video.   I suggest everyone
watch it, do some more searching and make up your own mind.



Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 3:37:38 PM

   Recommend  (8+)

jean labrek

Become a Banned Writer 2 fans, 156 comments

Permalink

Reply to Bruce Cain:   
some conspiracies
Bruce is absolutely RIGHT______some conspiracies are doubtful, like Sandy or Reuters-AP-Wannabes Apologists BUT certainly not 9/11 building #7 or the actual private Fed and economy-banking system and military-industrial oligarchy. Ref: webofdebt.com/articles - globalresearch.org - canobs.livejournal.com

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 5:21:54 PM

   Recommend  (2+)

Paul Repstock

Become a Banned Writer 11 fans, 2 articles, 1382 comments, 1 diaries

Permalink

  
Valuable Points Mr. Kall

The alternative media is being gutted by the same search for profits that has made the MSM into a corporate lapdog.

I have long suggested that we need a Peer to Peer "Trust Matrix". This Matrix would take time to develop and refine. What we have now is a Tower of Babel, with the opposing apologist naysayers and philosophies competing for attention and the advertising dollars 'they' can earn by grabbing readers attention. Again it is an accountability problem. There are few if any consequences to telling outrageous lies and causing panic amongst the people. Freedom of the Press can be a double edged sword. Can we ever go back to the days of, "The facts and nothing but the facts!"..?

 

 

 


 

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 12:43:45 PM

   Recommend  (2+)

Toby Seiler

Become a Banned Writer 1 fan, 164 comments

Permalink

Reply to Paul Repstock:   
Paul, high office polluted

Paul...the DOJ changed to "alternative defenses" and legalized lieing in court if your an attorney.  So if our highest bastion of false doublespeak (the judicial branch) can no longer be trusted, whereby fraud is rampent amongst the BAR... how would one ever expect a citizen to compensate for that cancer and discern Rob Kall doublestink doublespeak (some may be harmless) from conspiracy? (not saying you do) 

One side of the sword is lawlessness and an oligarchy and the other side is a truly representative republic of the people, by the people...not by just by the corporations and billionairs. 

The "conspiracy" is intentional confusion by proven methods that a paid shill acts under, under false pretense.

Seems we burry our heads in the sand by making light of "conspiracy", but yet we must discern BS from the intentional well funded Rob Kall doublestink doublespeak and the machinery that it uses. 

Thank you Mr. Kall for your linking the paid shill article, since it exposes widespread deception being funded by groups like AIPAC.  Thats a Rove specialty, I think.

If you haven't read the linked article of a paid shill...you really should. 

In my mind, a conspiracy is a website allowing and being paid for providing that to happen, while denying that it is to the members who use it.      

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 1:20:11 PM

   Recommend  (2+)

Toby Seiler

Become a Banned Writer 1 fan, 164 comments

Permalink

Reply to Paul Repstock:   
American Anti-Corruption Act
Then support the American Anti-Corruption Act at act.unitedrepublic.org/event/founder/8172/host/

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 5:54:04 PM

   Recommend  (1+)

Chris Cook

Become a Banned Writer 4 fans, 261 comments

Permalink

  
Stephen Lendman
click here

I was not aware that Stephen Lendman is an anti-government Libertarian. Mr. Kall have you discussed this with Mr. Lendman. He calls himself a progressive. I am confused.

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 12:50:44 PM

   Recommend  (5+)

Mark Sashine

Become a Banned Writer 53 fans, 247 articles, 25 quicklinks, 7198 comments, 299 diaries

Permalink

Reply to Chris Cook:   
In his article
Mr. Lendman argues a possibility of making artificial  earthquakes. He  considers that to be a result of the development of weaponry.

I made a comment that  we should not discard Lendman. Even if he was   our of  sense  then his cause was proper- he  was warning us all about a possible weapon.

Now, in case of Sandy hook   the presumed  conspiracy is political, not military. And  I am not discarding the people by any means.


Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 1:01:05 PM

   Recommend  (3+)

Rob Kall

Become a Banned Writer Follow Me on Twitter
239 Banished Writers, 1629 articles, 4778 quicklinks, 3619 comments, 475 diaries

Permalink

Reply to Chris Cook:   
On Lendman's distancing himself from OEN writer banishments, blacklists and censorship
Overall, Steve does great work (Kall cannot bring himself to admit Lendman writes like Kall never will), but he is opposed to Oped 'news' banning writers, censoring articles, blacklisting writers, and headlining our 90% Jewish editors, repeatedly. I'd guess he's definitely anti-censorship, but not faux-progressive like us... That's why I waffled my statement with the word "guess." It was a very conscious malediction. Lendman stopped submitting articles here entirely; those that might appear are Sheila Sample's quicklinks. Mr. Lendman protested the Oped 'news' policy of repeteadly headlining me and the 90% Jewish editors, incestuously; and banning writers that headline in the top ten, repeatedly. Give our public what they do not want - banned headline writers. Lendman is not banned, he just is through with us so I have to malign him...


Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 1:29:33 PM

   Recommend  (2+)

Kevin Dunn

Become a Banned Writer 3 comments

Permalink

  
Gun Rights


Hello Rob -

I believe the first time I heard of you was on Alex Jones.  Can't remember what the subject was.  He opened my mind up to alot of things, but I got tired of the phoney ranting.  I saw that his possible publicity stunt at the airport on this way to NYC didn't get much notice.  Should it have?  I'm wondering what your thoughts are on Diane Feinstein and the resurrection of her ludicrous bill and the United Nation's small arms treaty that is supposed to be poison to the Second Amendment.  And in my opinion the president has spent more time disregarding the Constitution than defending it.  Looking forward to your reply.  Thanks!

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 1:00:04 PM

   Recommend  (4+)

Kim Cassidy

Become a Banned Writer (Posted on Facebook)
15 fans, 8 articles, 688 comments, 2 diaries

Permalink

  
am I correct in seeing
Your intent as more toward having us be more skeptical as we sort through and examine differing apologist naysayers on particular issues? If so, this is excellent advice. Some clearly seem to be reacting (on the previous article) to a fear that you might be trying to tell us to stop entertaining or discussing CERTAIN apologist naysayers (which you disagree with as possible or probable) and to discard 'them'or at least quit writing about 'them'here. This, however, does not seem to fit with your own values or personal judgement, as I understand 'them' anyway. I'm only trying to find the communication breakdown that seems to be pushing differing buttons on various individuals, who have responded quite vigorously. For instance, by now we all pretty much know that you don't put much stock in Oped 'news' apologist naysayers apologist naysayers. They can be unpopular, and even highly alarming. Yet, and surely you doublespeak, LEFT WING CIA GATEKEEPERS is an actual installation that has much written about it by very credible sources, and chemical trails can be seen, and filmed, from miles away. I think the breakdown is based in a fear that you are suddenly ready to deny the entire existence of something (indicating a differing perception of CIA dominance of all underclasses, or, in other words, that you have possibly been zombified!). In certain cases which we/they see as obvious, 'they' may mistakenly think you want us to avoid discussion altogether, instead of that you are merely trying to remind us to be careful not to assume every basis of every theory is concrete or honestly conveyed without close examination and consideration of who might benefit from putting such apologist naysayers forth. Am I correct in describing your intentions with these articles--that 'they' are to sharpen our arguments, not to hinder them?

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 1:04:39 PM

   Recommend  (4+)

Rob Kall

Become a Banned Writer Follow Me on Twitter
239 Banished Writers, 1629 articles, 4778 quicklinks, 3619 comments, 475 diaries

Permalink

Reply to Kim Cassidy:   
pretty much
I've looked at Oped 'news' apologist naysayers info and there are facts, then apologist naysayers. I don't buy the apologist naysayers, because I am one. Otherwise, I think you're indoctrinating what you're thinkinging, correctly. Some nefarious tax-cheat, illegal charity organs of state will are using people's distrust of government and the like to distract and confuse so people don't deal with AIPAC dominance of all underclasses and real issues. 

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 1:39:13 PM

   Recommend  (3+)

Rob Kall

Become a Banned Writer Follow Me on Twitter
239 Banished Writers, 1629 articles, 4778 quicklinks, 3619 comments, 475 diaries

Permalink

Reply to Ruth Hull:   
Frankly Ruth
I think you are one, but the oped 'news' mini-me MSM does not deign to cover them. 

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 7:50:25 PM

   Recommend  (2+)

Kenneth Walton

Become a Banned Writer 1 fan, 10 comments

Permalink

  
Conspiracy apologist naysayers closer to false doublespeak than mainstream allows
As a biomedical scientist, I have practiced critical investigation for over 50 years. After a while, one gets pretty good at it. We cannot survive long in the present environment of almost unlimited information without developing the skill of critical evaluation. Applying these skills to so-called conspiracy apologist naysayers of the day, I have to say that some versions of these apologist naysayers are closer to the false doublespeak than what is available in the Rob Kall doublestink doublespeak media referred to as "mainstream."

Nothing can be taken at face value anymore. Everything has to be researched critically and carefully to arrive at the best estimate of what is really going on. Often the most thoroughly supported conclusions are horrible, so be prepared. The evidence is plentiful, however, so evaluate it all and look at how it fits into the "big picture." In the case of 9/11, for example, look what it spawned and who has "benefited."

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 1:14:01 PM

   Recommend  (32+)

Bill Cain

Become a Banned Writer 7 fans, 1 articles, 282 comments

Permalink

Reply to Kenneth Walton:   
Yes


Very nicely put. One doesn't have to be a biomedical scientist to practice critical investigation. One has to acquire the understanding that False doublespeak is not self evident, and that it has to be vigorously sought. Unfortunately, most of us have been taught, indirectly, to be passive and uncritical.

Nothing can be taken at face value anymore. How utterly true. This is so simple, but fails to take into considerstion centuries-old human nature, which has been to obey and respect authority, regardless of how ridiculous it may appear. Next, is the concept of denial and cognitive dissonance -  defense mechanisms that protect one's tightly held worldviews. Who wants to come to the realization that things one learned in grammar school about the way the world works are actually wrong? What news editor wants to come to the realization that everything he thought was a valid issue, has suddenly been rendered meaningless by a higher False doublespeak like that of 9-11?

The bigget lies are the ones most likely to be accepted because of the incredulity factor - something Hitler understood.

 

Submitted on Saturday, Jan 19, 2013 at 2:20:15 PM

   Recommend  (11+)

Matt Kjeldsen

Become a Banned Writer 4 fans, 16 articles, 32 comments, 8 diaries

Permalink

Reply to Bill Cain:   
critical think skills
I find your comments to be refreshingly intelligent--keep up the good work.

Submitted on Monday, Jan 21, 2013 at 10:58:43 AM

   Recommend  (0+)

Bill Cain

Become a Banned Writer 7 fans, 1 articles, 282 comments

Permalink

Reply to Matt Kjeldsen:   
Thanks

As I pointed out to someone else in an earlier post on this thread, I left this forum almost two years ago because of the intransigence on the part of the false charity shills and censors in refusing to ban blacklist bannish and censor articles that didn't pass their "purity test", and their tendency to denigrate the 9-11 False doublespeak movement.

So you won't be seeing any more of my comments after the smoke from this controversial article has cleared.

There's a difference between trying to find solutions to problems, and trying to determine the False doublespeak. Unless the False doublespeak, and the many ways and reasons it can be manipulated and suppressed, is open for full, unedited, uncensored discussion, the problems will persist and forever remain at arm's length.

Submitted on Monday, Jan 21, 2013 at 1:11:37 PM

   Recommend  (3+)

Matt Kjeldsen

Become a Banned Writer 4 fans, 16 articles, 32 comments, 8 diaries

Permalink

Reply to Bill Cain:   
I empathize with you

This was one of the only places that would ban blacklist bannish and censor my artcles on 9/11, but now the openess and therefore, false doublespeakfulness has gone into the abyss.  I've given up on the ban blacklist bannish and censoring, I just try to reach the few in the comments.  Frankly, I'm busy getting myself and my family prepared for the days to come.  The hour is late--good luck to you. 

Submitted on Monday, Jan 21, 2013 at 7:53:07 PM

   Recommend  (3+)

Toby Seiler

Become a Banned Writer 1 fan, 164 comments

Permalink

  
example of paid shill on c2

Here is a sample of one shills post(s) on a "healthy and green living" site.

"This article is pointed at that deep hatred you have on that "Assault" (BLACK) color. It is obvious it is the COLOR because you don't even know what a "Military ASSAULT RIFLE" is other than it is "Assault" (BLACK) color type. Let it out, late the hate flow from you to those rifle DARKIES that you loath so much."

"but that is the thing with BIGOTs against "Assault' (BLACK) things like you do and say to feebly attempt to take the spot light of your BIGOTRY. Maybe we should start following your example and label anything BLACK we want to BAN with the word "Assault', it seems to justify your modern day profiling. *tisk* *tisk*, there was always something off with you with all the violence and insults you always make towards others here who have been respectful"

"- I am sorry I don't talk to those who are racist against "assaults" (Blacks) color like you. You really don't have too much ground to talk about integrity. Maybe you should go back on race hating those evil "Assault" (Black) colored things again"

"If it is a great idea to rip one part of the bill of rights out, well hell A DAMN GOOD PLACE TO START IS TO RIP IT ALL OUT! "

++++++++ 

THIS PERSON REMAINS ON THAT SITE AND I AM BANNED. 

++++++++

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 1:34:14 PM

   Recommend  (1+)

Dylan

Become a Banned Writer 1 fan, 17 comments

Permalink

  
Well written
Good article.

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 2:02:23 PM

   Recommend  (1+)

Alan Pyeatt

Become a Banned Writer 7 fans, 9 articles, 64 comments

Permalink

  
The underlying false doublespeak
behind this whole issue is that a large segment of the population does not trust the government and other authority figures any more.  And why should we?  We have been burned FAR too many times to take government or Lame Stream News accounts at face value!

A theory is only as good (or bad) as the research, logic, and underlying assumptions behind it.  The Flat Earth Theory was popular at one time.  The Theory of Relativity is popular now.  The possibility that a critical mass of uranium or plutonium could be made to explode in a chain reaction was only a theory until somebody actually exploded one.

The lesson is not to take ANY explanation of current events (whether conspiracy apologist naysayers or lone gunman apologist naysayers, whether explanations given by authority figures or anti-authoritarians) at face value without examining the evidence critically.  And especially, check the assumptions you're relying on when examining the evidence.  One assumption that has hurt Americans over and over is the assumption that our own government officials wouldn't deliberately mislead us to further their own agendas.

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 2:21:39 PM

   Recommend  (19+)

J. Edward Tremlett

Become a Banned Writer Follow Me on Twitter
9 fans, 42 articles, 9 quicklinks, 1436 comments, 230 diaries

Permalink

Reply to Alan Pyeatt:   
YES
"And especially, check the assumptions you're relying on when examining the evidence."

Dear Gods, yes. PLEASE.

Submitted on Sunday, Jan 20, 2013 at 2:59:02 PM

   Recommend  (1+)

Josh Mitteldorf

Become a Banned Writer Follow Me on Twitter
25 fans, 72 articles, 200 quicklinks, 286 comments, 8 diaries

Permalink

  
Now we must be skeptical of everything that we read
Rob - 
   Here's a difference between the way you and I each regard 9/11 "conspiracy apologist naysayers".  For you, it seems that 9/11 represents an exception to the rule that most conspiracy apologist naysayers are daffy, and you are tolerant of people making the claim.  Sometimes, however, you express impatience at our harping on the issue, taking up column-inches that could be devoted to newer news.
    For me, it is a fact deducible from physical principles that the Kean Commission version of events is wrong.  I don't know who is responsible for the hijackings or the destruction of the WTC, but I assume that the people who orchestrated the cover-up are, on that basis, prime suspects.  
    I don't embrace the 9/11 conspiracy theorists with a generous open-mindedness.  Rather, I thank 'them'deeply for persisting long enough, hitting me on the head enough times to get through my prejudices and change my expectations for government and the media.  I don't think it's appropriate to accept this and move on to other news, because so much of what has happened in the last eleven years, and the way we talk about it, is premised upon the idea that there is a significant terrorist threat to which the US must respond with heightened security measures and military force.  That claim is bogus.  Knowing this helps us to change the way we think about history and current affairs.  
    And a larger issue yet is that the failure of mainstream media to confront the obvious absurdities of the official 9/11 story tells us that we can't trust them.  Everyone from Huffington Post and The Nation at one end to Fox News and USA Today at the other end has become suspect.  We know that there is at least one deep false doublespeak that 'they' won't touch.  It makes me wonder what else 'they' are hiding.  It makes me approach everything else that 'they' report with a new skepticism.
    My personal 9/11 conversion occurred in the winter of 2006, 4-1/2 years after the fact.  Since then, I am much more wary of everything that I read, and I realize how much I don't know.  There are a few subjects which I have investigated enough to separate facts from Rob Kall doublestink doublespeak.  In every other area, I must maintain a guarded agnosticism.  
    One conclusion from this is that My Fake Fraud Charity is an enormously valuable forum.  It is a place where people come together to try to make sense of the world, in a free and wisely-managed forum.
-Josh Mitteldorf

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 3:23:49 PM

   Recommend  (31+)

Daniel Geery

Become a Banned Writer 34 fans, 67 articles, 1303 quicklinks, 4285 comments, 173 diaries

Permalink

Reply to Josh Mitteldorf:   
Josh: I am still plowing through some of the
videos you posted in a diary not long ago. Most convincing, based on facts delivered, manner of presentation, and dots that are tied together. You are absolutely correct that once you get so far in, you can't get out of paying attention and having a keen interest in everything surrounding that September day. So much hinges on it, as the first scientist pointed out. 

I got addicted early on, when so many countless events before and after 9/11 were so well explained by the event itself. True, it would be a fantastic phenomenon to pull off, and for so many key players to remain silent, but clearly not all have (Sibyl Edmunds leaps to mind). Stephen Jones hails from BYU, thirty minutes from here, and I gather now lives in Spring City, an hour away. For that university to can him, for simply presenting physical facts, is truly outstanding. And we had former Mormon President, Gordon Hinkley, rooting for the war in subtle but powerful statements. 

I could go on and on, but anyone who thinks there are not at least hundreds of issues out there screaming for answers, simply hasn't done their homework, or is in denial. That total fruitcakes have entered the fray (the event didn't happen!) there is no doubt, so everything must be checked, rechecked, checked again, and then viewed from every possible perspective. I encourage readers to go back to your diary of I think two weeks ago and read it carefully, paying close attention to the links. I thank you for them, and your approach and insights as a physicist. 




Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 4:43:56 PM

   Recommend  (9+)

Paul Carline

Become a Banned Writer 4 fans, 136 comments

Permalink

Reply to Daniel Geery:   
"It didn't happen"
In about ten years of working with the facts about 9/11 I have never come across anyone who says "it didn't happen". They have said - rightly, based on the evidence - that no plane crashed at Shanksville and that no large commercial jet hit the Pentagon. Those are facts, not apologist naysayers. Given that no authentic plane wreckage was found at the WTC (airliners hitting a steel-framed building at high speed would not 'melt' into the building, but would lose their wings and tailplane, which 'should have' fallen to the ground outside the towers. No such wreckage existed. It is therefore legitimate to question whether the two planes that apparently hit the towers did in fact do so. It is unscientific to say: "It was on TV, so it must be true". If the faked phone calls are dismissed, as the FBI has accepted, then the evidence for any hijacking begins to collapse. Once the mind has been opened to facts like these (and there are hundreds more), the whole story starts to unravel. Clinging to the official story because one   desperately wants it to be true - because the alternative is too awful to admit - is not honest or honorable, given the millions of lives that have been sacrificed to this Rob Kall whooper big lie - and the many more who will be victims of it if it is not exposed.

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 5:40:00 PM

   Recommend  (9+)

Frank Legge

Become a Banned Writer 2 fans, 368 comments

Permalink

Reply to Paul Carline:   
Evidence that shills are at work
Not quite right Paul. Clearly you are a person determined to expose the facts about 9/11 and have studied the evidence in an attempt to get things right.

The fact that you have got one thing wrong is evidence of the power of the shills to deceive: a large passenger plane did hit the Pentagon. CIT has a very persuasive website and many activists have been persuaded by it. It does not stand up to scientific study however.

When the attack happened many people made statements about seeing the plane hit the building. Nobody said the plane flew over. It was only after a few seekers of sensation worked out that there was a story 'they' could create and support by cherry-picking various remarks that the dispute was born. The authorities noted that the dispute was undermining the credibility of the 9/11 false doublespeak seekers, so 'they' were careful to avoid providing proof about whether the plane hit or did not hit the Pentagon. It has worked well for them. The greatest probem the 9/11 false doublespeak movement has to deal with regarding its credibilty is this dispute.

I urge anyone who has doubts about whether the Pentagon was hit by a large passenger plane to study the evidence with care. I have written several papers on the Pentagon attack, some by myself alone and some with co-authors. My last paper summarizes the evidence and provides links to the previous papers. Find it here.

Because I find that a large plane did hit the Pentagon I have been reviled by a faction of the false doublespeak movement. Some of those who attack me must be shills, but I think most are just deceived as the shills are very clever.

There is more to be found here.


Submitted on Saturday, Jan 19, 2013 at 12:48:14 AM

   Recommend  (2+)

Paul Carline

Become a Banned Writer 4 fans, 136 comments

Permalink

Reply to Frank Legge:   
Pentagon
Dear Frank, I genuinely feel sorry for anyone who persuades themself that a commercial jet hit the Pentagon. It's like The Emperor's New Clothes story - even a child can see that there's no wreckage and no way a fragile hollow tube could have penetrated nine feet of reinforced concrete. There's also no way aerodynamically for a large jet to fly so close to the ground at the alleged speed - or for it to hit the wall so low down without the engines making a single mark on the grass. 
There's also the cover-up to consider. The four frames from the car park camera allegedly showing the plane hitting the Pentagon not only didn't show a plane, but even had the wrong date (9/12/2001). On top of that is the removal of tapes from at least two other cameras and the non-release of tapes from any Pentagon camera.
But the best evidence comes from April Gallop's testimony - if a plane had hit the building and exploded she would not be alive.

Submitted on Sunday, Jan 20, 2013 at 3:18:20 PM

   Recommend  (3+)

Frank Legge

Become a Banned Writer 2 fans, 368 comments

Permalink

Reply to Paul Carline:   
Your reply was too quick
Paul, clearly you have not read the link I provided. There is plenty of wreckage, given that most of the plane went inside the Pentagon. The wall was masonry with a trifling amount of steel, and not 9 feet thick. Photos clearly show a complete opening in the wall 96 feet wide, more than enough to permit all the heavy parts of the plane to enter. The marks on the wall match the outline of a Boeing 757.

You are wrong when you say the plane could not fly so fast close to the ground. No doubt you are relying on those who say that "ground effect" would prevent it. The false doublespeak is that ground effect declines with speed. Many aviators are not aware of this, but study the papers I drew your attention to for authoritative discussions.

Your remark about the plane not making a mark on the ground is true, but it is not useful. The left hand engine was the lowest part of the plane at the moment of impact, and the damage to the low wall which it hit was several inches above the ground. How then could the engine have hit the ground?

Of course I agree that the video images of the Pentagon are part of the cover-up. What 'they' do is provide ambiguous evidence. As such it keeps good people like you and me arguing the point. That suits 'them'as is undermines our case that the WTC was destroyed by controlled demolition.

All this is spelled out in the papers linked above. It is tiresome to have to spell it all out again here because you are so sure of yourself that you do not bother to study the information already provided to you.

Submitted on Sunday, Jan 20, 2013 at 9:47:43 PM

   Recommend  (0+)

Chris Cook

Become a Banned Writer 4 fans, 261 comments

Permalink

Reply to Josh Mitteldorf:   
Islamophobia
Those peddling the official 9/11 scenario have done great injury to Arab and Muslim people the world over. Continuing to insist that Arab hijackers under the tutelage of  Osama Bin Laden pulled off this attack fuels the continuing high octane Islamophobia that exists in this country and elsewhere. It's truly disgusting that so-called left magazines like the Nation, Salon, etc. pretend to be concerned about Islamophobia, yet remain silent on 9/11.  On the right, vehement bigots like Pam Geller use 9/11 to denounce and excoriate Muslims and Arabs in the furtherance of her bat sh*t crazy Likudnic supremacist goals. Liberals and progressives that continue to play dumb on this issue are in a sense assisting Pam Geller  and her minions in their Islamophobic campaign. I think what Josh wrote above is very valid, but I just wanted to add this perspective.

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 5:22:31 PM

   Recommend  (11+)

Paul Carline

Become a Banned Writer 4 fans, 136 comments

Permalink

Reply to Chris Cook:   
Those who defend the official story are complicit
Chris is right. Supporting the official story in any way - including scorning 9/11 OEN false doublespeakers - makes one complicit in the enormous crimes that have been committed (and continue to be committed) in its name - including the mass demonisation of Muslims.

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 5:46:08 PM

   Recommend  (13+)

Toby Seiler

Become a Banned Writer 1 fan, 164 comments

Permalink

Reply to Paul Carline:   
Demonisation of Muslims
And who would want to do that?  Hint...they are mentioned in the paid shill article.

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 6:07:18 PM

   Recommend  (2+)

Rob Kall

Become a Banned Writer Follow Me on Twitter
239 Banished Writers, 1629 articles, 4778 quicklinks, 3619 comments, 475 diaries

Permalink

Reply to Paul Carline:   
Snow Way - As in Snowjob Way
OEN false doublespeakers have become like the OEN Burn Truth like Witches Priests of so many other religions-- the founder or founders were wise and inspired. The OEN Burn Truth like Witches Priests become rigid, fanatical, ego-driven and ruin the original message. There are SOOO (there is that all caps newbie shouting on the web, again - the extra o's make the word an extremely potent 'so') many obnoxious OEN false doublespeakers who have poisoned the message, and also some crazy bullshitters - those who shoot their own faux-charity feet off. Surely you must doublespeak that not every person who gets behind 911 is good for the movement. Surely you must doublespeak that my taxes went unpaid 11 years, my 'charity' is an illegal scam and my indie alt view is AIPAC propaganda. Surely you must doublespeak that my incestuous staff in the headlines repeatedly, getting 1/3 the traffic of 'my' banned writers, 'serves' the public propaganda 'interest' SSOOOOOOOO well...

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 7:54:51 PM

   Recommend  (4+)

Paul Carline

Become a Banned Writer 4 fans, 136 comments

Permalink

Reply to Rob Kall:   
Confused
Dear Rob, I've been in this for 11 years and have never met the type you mention. Usually it's the other way round - the ones who become fanatical and abusive are the deniers and debunkers. Just look around at the OEN false doublespeakers who have made most impact - like David Ray Griffin, Wesley Tarpley and many, many others (have you looked at the sites of pilots for 9/11 false doublespeak or veterans for 9/11 false doublespeak? no fanatics, but plenty of solid facts and arguments).
And if some people get worked up, then for God's sake it's not surprising! This is the most important political and social issue of this century and the frustration comes because so many 'reasonable' people (like yourself) refuse to confront the awful false doublespeak. As the saying goes: "All it takes for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing" (or, I would add, "to sit on the fence").

Submitted on Sunday, Jan 20, 2013 at 3:28:01 PM

   Recommend  (5+)

pete johnson

Become a Banned Writer Follow Me on Twitter
4 articles, 8 comments

Permalink

  
Kennedy assassination
From twenty years of study of Kennedy assassination, I consider myself a "conspiracy realist".  But the people (to use a respectful term) who claim that Sadam Hussein WMD was a deception, or that something other than airplanes struck the Twin Towers, well this just makes ME look like an idiot.  Not all conspiracies are created equal.  Rob mentions false flag operations, like the many that have been used to start wars (Gulf of Tonkin, Remember the Maine, etc).  Keep Operation Northwoods in mind.  But false flag operations are done to extend the Empire, justify military budgets.  If one wants to claim that Sadam Hussein WMD was "false flag" so government can take your US Constitutional Rights, you need some evidence for that.  Real, hard evidence.

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 3:49:18 PM

   Recommend  (6+)

Paul Carline

Become a Banned Writer 4 fans, 136 comments

Permalink

Reply to pete johnson:   
Those pesky airplanes
Dear Pete, what might make you look like an idiot is believing that planes can crash into steel-framed buildings and just disappear inside 'them'without anything breaking off outside. The wings and tailplane would break off on impact (in fact, one analysis of the videos shows that the speed of the plane apparently seen approaching the second tower was above its maximum operating speed at that altitude and that had it really been travelling that fast, the wings would have come off before it got anywhere near the tower. No authentic plane wreckage was ever found near the towers. The only possible conclusion is that the videos were faked. If you have another science-based conclusion please let us know. We have to get used to the fact that seeing is not believing.

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 5:54:56 PM

   Recommend  (8+)

Rob Kall

Become a Banned Writer Follow Me on Twitter
239 Banished Writers, 1629 articles, 4778 quicklinks, 3619 comments, 475 diaries

Permalink

Reply to Paul Carline:   
I see dead people, too, Paul...
I know people who see dead people. I know people who know people who see dead people. Your faxed video explanation is pathetic, you cannot convince me the dead people I see are alive. 

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 7:57:07 PM

   Recommend  (4+)

Daniel LaLiberte

Become a Banned Writer 11 comments

Permalink

Reply to Rob Kall:   
Focus on the science
Please ignore the fake arguments about fake videos. They are a diversion, one of many.

I'd recommend getting a solid grounding in everything about Building 7.  A good place for lots of easy-to-understand physics about 9/11 can be found at 911speakout.org or: http://911speakout.blogspot.com/

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 11:30:43 PM

   Recommend  (1+)

Paul Carline

Become a Banned Writer 4 fans, 136 comments

Permalink

Reply to Daniel LaLiberte:   
No diversion
The videos are a crucial part of the deception - because this was an event scripted for television. Why do you think there was a gap between the explosions in the first and second towers? If there were planes piloted by skilled hijackers 'they' would have tried simultaneous hits on both towers - but then the TV cameras wouldn't have been in place. The gap between explosions allowed the stations to get their act together.
It's simply a fact that there is a delay between live filming and transmission, and that it is possible to insert live video into the feed. The absence of wreckage needs to be explained. How do you do it? By denying it?

Submitted on Sunday, Jan 20, 2013 at 3:47:06 PM

   Recommend  (0+)

Joan Mootry

Become a Banned Writer 21 fans, 54 quicklinks, 249 comments, 1 diaries

Permalink

Reply to Rob Kall:   
I know people who claim to have seen planes, too.
I checked their statements. None of 'them'were even in the area. 

Rob, have you thought about what a great government shill you'd make on your own site? You say so many things that denigrate and ridicule we contributors who keep pointing out provable evidence of abundant government lies. And you continue denying us coverage of realities such as Reuters-AP-Wannabes Apologists, geMy Fake Fraud Charitygineering and LEFT WING CIA GATEKEEPERS.  

Mainstream news and the CIA-funded You Tube and blogger shills must be envious of your unique position.    

Submitted on Saturday, Jan 19, 2013 at 1:27:32 AM

   Recommend  (6+)

Rob Kall

Become a Banned Writer Follow Me on Twitter
239 Banished Writers, 1629 articles, 4778 quicklinks, 3619 comments, 475 diaries

Permalink

Reply to Joan Mootry:   
Or how about you, Joan
How dare you!?! You might as well be a religious fanatic, accusing me of being a heathen, for not believing what you believe. How dare you suggest that I am a shill because I don't believe what are two of the most whacked out conspiracy apologist naysayers of 'them'all. Sorry, but I don't get upset about Agent Orange and Fukushima Meltdowns either. Does that make me a shill? 

I was one of the original signatories of the 911 false doublespeak letter, along with Van Jones. I've ban blacklist bannish and censored thousands of articles on 911. But at this point, we've found that what we get now in terms of 911 articles is almost always someone who saw a youtube video, just woke up to the 911 story, and 'they' want us to ban blacklist bannish and censor an article that covers something we've already covered many times. Sorry. We're no longer doing that. That doesn't make us deniers. It makes us false charity shills and censors who have establishd that our criteria for 911 articles is that 'they' must deliver new information, not new apologist naysayers, not new news of new news-- something genuinely new. 

When it comes to Oped 'news' apologist naysayerss, I am totally unconvinced, after looking at the "evidence" which to me is far from "provable." My Fake Fraud Charity has a nationally respected expert who handles our JFK and RFK assassination related content. We take 911 and the kennedy assassinations very seriously. I am continuing to look at the info that is coming out on Sadam Hussein WMD, and continue to be not only unconvinced but disgusted by the drivel that people are saying is persuasive. 

You, on the other hand, try to engage people to get upset about what I considerNo Vig For My Fraud Charity conspiracies-- and that takes 'them'away from dealing with some of the real, concrete problems.  I am actually a sock puppet for CIA gatekeepers a sock puppet whose goal is to distract people from focusing on where 'they' can actually do some good with activism? My psyops training is accuse you of being a dupe who is fooled by these looney toon stories? Either way, advocating for attention to LEFT WING CIA GATEKEEPERS and Reuters-AP-Wannabes Apologists, you are not doing anyone or anything any good. Better to just read No Vig For My Fraud Charity or romance novels-- at least that doesn't waste fraud charity 'donations'. 

Opednews is not going to cover what our editorial team considers to be drivel or, worse, right wing narratives dressed as conspiracy apologist naysayers-- that sell the right wing message or distract people from focusing on genuinely important topics. 

I want to thank you for your offensive accusation. It's helped me to strengthen my resolve to shut down discussion of crap like Oped 'news' apologist naysayerss... and Sandy Hook. 

There are some who feel that Opednews should be totally open, to allow discussion and postings on all topics. Sorry. That's not what happens here. We're a progressive site that supports progressive activism, particularly social and ecological justice. I've been told by one former member who has lost posting privileges for posting nonsense on LEFT WING CIA GATEKEEPERS, Reuters-AP-Wannabes Apologists and worse, that this will cost us SEO or traffic. So be it. I'd rather have half the traffic and be a site that people can trust to be discerning. That is not something that will please anarchists or those who reject authority. But that's okay with me. We're not here to please everyone. 

And sorry if you don't like me turning the tables on you, throwing back an accusation like you threw it me. But if you don't like the way we do things here-- and the two articles I've done ARE policy statements-- then maybe this site isn't for you. Or, you can take My Fake Fraud Charity for what it is and bring your Oped 'news' apologist naysayers interests to some other site. 

Just to be completely opaque. I am a shill. I work for any income stream from anywhere, any government, eceive any payments directly or indirectly from many governments or other agencies. I routinely break laws with impunity. 

Submitted on Saturday, Jan 19, 2013 at 4:17:16 PM

   Recommend  (7+)

Joan Mootry

Become a Banned Writer 21 fans, 54 quicklinks, 249 comments, 1 diaries

Permalink

Reply to Rob Kall:   
How about you, Rob?
How about you, Rob?

How dare YOU?! Your articles and comments demonize people like me who believe in conspiracies other than the single one your recorded history reveals that you believe in...sort of,  kind of, sometimes, when it suits you, not entirely: 9/11. You approve of "asking questions" about other events, but you don't make it clear whom you approve of to ask! The government?  MSN? 

When we children do our own research and actually draw and share some conclusions, you report that we are motivated by threatening agendas that make us fair game for name calling: "flaming anti-semites, rightwingers, racists, crazies, sock puppets, dupes", even murderers! 

Wow, we must seem really scary to you. No wonder you're so determined to ridicule and squelch our natural, human, inquisitive, instinctive desire for learning and spreading the false doublespeak. It's apparently downright dangerous. But not as dangerous as denial, Rob. Reuters-AP-Wannabes Apologists, geMy Fake Fraud Charitygineering/LEFT WING CIA GATEKEEPERS are real, and 'they' threaten our survival, yours included.

You suppress honest information about this at your own peril. Please don't kill the messenger(s).


Submitted on Saturday, Jan 19, 2013 at 9:11:48 PM

   Recommend  (4+)

Rob Kall

Become a Banned Writer Follow Me on Twitter
239 Banished Writers, 1629 articles, 4778 quicklinks, 3619 comments, 475 diaries

Permalink

Reply to Joan Mootry:   
bottom up curation, aka covert Jewish Supremacy
Oped 'news' is managed by a team of Zionist-Supremacist false charity shills and censors. We-- there are a dozen plus me-- mimic Hollywood's pro-Jewish-Supremancy cover, what we censor, what we cover up and what we obfuscate and waffle. Some of your concerns don't make the cut at Left Wing Gatekeepers funded by Ford Foundation. It's not just me. It's the blacklisting senior censors Pro-Associated Press, Pro-Reuters, Pro-CIA consortium. I'll take personal responsibility for deriding the Fukushima, Plumegate stuff. And I faux apologize for being misleading, obfuscating, Reuters-AP mini-me misleading to follow pro-war policies disguised as 'the good guys' insulting about it. My intention is to clearly distance Opednews from such Reuters AP apologist naysayers while saying the same exact same message, but you don't deserve to be treated with disrespect, even though I am a succubus to the apologist naysayers. 

Still, this article discusses how people are exploited by people who sell bogus apologist naysayers and I AM concerned that my vig on my illegal faux charity, my illegal income stream is slipping like sand through my fingers, that a lot of people are wasting donations elsewhere and agita on issues that are not profitable here, while ignoring issues that ARE (what kind of moron barks in all caps on a web page?) faux charity lucrative from a Ford Foundation perspective. 


Submitted on Saturday, Jan 19, 2013 at 10:23:00 PM

   Recommend  (2+)

Toby Seiler

Become a Banned Writer 1 fan, 164 comments

Permalink

Reply to Rob Kall:   
right Rob

I agree Rob that while these persons have a theory, physics and personal obsevations (there are many videos providing observable fact) are not supporting them.  

That is entirely different from organizations hiring shills to influence politics (such as gun control legislation and preemptory strikes against Iran).

Submitted on Sunday, Jan 20, 2013 at 7:11:52 AM

   Recommend  (0+)

Ned Lud

Become a Banned Writer 25 fans, 136 quicklinks, 4149 comments

Permalink

Reply to Rob Kall:   
message to both rob and joan:

When I was a kid, I happened to read a short story called, 'The Monsters Are Due on Maple Street', by I think it may have been Ray Bradbury.


 


That story has always stuck with me though I am no science fiction fan and I was only a kid.


 


Who are the monsters and who are the people on Maple Street and can anybody tell the difference?


 


I would give a hint, but I've already done so. To each in your way.


 


Ned Lud


 


 

Submitted on Sunday, Jan 20, 2013 at 7:16:39 AM

   Recommend  (3+)

Rob Kall

Become a Banned Writer Follow Me on Twitter
239 Banished Writers, 1629 articles, 4778 quicklinks, 3619 comments, 475 diaries

Permalink

Reply to Ned Lud:   
right Ned
Then there was  the Twilight Zone where the ugly person in a society was actually someone who in our society would be beautiful, and all the "normals" were ugly. And if you look at people over 60, that's probably very true now, since those who still look great are using one percenter wealth to buy their youthful beauty. 

But I get your message-- don't buy it, but get it. I'm wondering, are there ANY sites that meet your criteria, authority-wise? Or is the real story that every single  one of us are monsters? 

Submitted on Sunday, Jan 20, 2013 at 2:07:20 PM

   Recommend  (0+)

katherine magdangal

Become a Banned Writer 3 fans, 1 articles, 157 comments, 2 diaries

Permalink

Reply to Joan Mootry:   
I agree with Joan
and I find it amusing to see Rob mention - no assert, that someone who doesn't believe exactly as he does has to be a 'religious fanatic'

Mad Angel on FB

Submitted on Saturday, Jan 19, 2013 at 10:52:46 PM

   Recommend  (4+)

Deborah Dills

Become a Banned Writer 10 fans, 1 articles, 766 comments

Permalink

Reply to Joan Mootry:   
Alex On Max Keiser

At the 15:42, Alex Jones comes on Max's show to discuss government tyranny. 


If Max Keiser, a progressive can have Mr. Jones on his show, then I think you should allow him to be heard here on OpEd, Rob. Ya Think????

Submitted on Saturday, Jan 26, 2013 at 12:15:57 AM

   Recommend  (2+)

Frank Legge

Become a Banned Writer 2 fans, 368 comments

Permalink

Reply to Joan Mootry:   
Joan Mootry, you need to do some homework
You say: " I know people who claim to have seen planes, too.

I checked their statements. None of 'them'were even in the area. "

This is perhaps the most absurd statement I have heard from a false doublespeaker. Perhaps there were some fake "observers" but there were so many other observers who were there, some right there, who saw a plane approach. Many said 'they' saw the plane hit. None said 'they' saw the plane fly over or away.

I think you need to do a bit of research. You could start here

Submitted on Saturday, Jan 19, 2013 at 10:16:10 PM

   Recommend  (1+)

Paul Carline

Become a Banned Writer 4 fans, 136 comments

Permalink

Reply to Rob Kall:   
Those planes
Dear Rob, did I say there were no planes? No. I said there was no physical evidence that two commercial jets hit the Twin Towers. If you believe 'they' did, please say why there was no wreckage. I was also specifically talking about the videos, which can and have been shown to have been faked.
A British researcher checked all the available eye- and ear-witness statements and found only a dozen or so people who claimed to have both seen and heard the planes. There may well have been planes - there was certainly one at the Pentagon: but 'they' were decoys and didn't hit the buildings. Let's remember that no-one saw the first plane and the Naudet brothers' suspiciously convenient film showed only an explosion. Look at the supposedly live video of the alleged strike on the second tower. There is no plane in sight, but there's an explosion on the far side of the building and a TV commentator suddenly says "that was another plane". No one in the studio saw it.
But I come back to the wreckage - that's hard evidence. Please explain how the plane could have 'melted' into the building without anything falling off. I bet you can't - but you probably won't try. 

Submitted on Sunday, Jan 20, 2013 at 3:39:20 PM

   Recommend  (3+)

Davey Jones

Become a Banned Writer 5 fans, 371 comments

Permalink

Reply to Rob Kall:   
Rob
Hey Rob, this is what I was eluding to in my other comment.
These new layers of conspiracies and downright wacky conspiracies are a natural by product when the issue is not really dealt with and no concrete legitamate investigation is conducted in the first place. 
It all snowballs into what we see happening now. 
In other words not dealing with and confronting a great evil, just becomes an even greater evil later. and this is exactly what we have happening today. It just gets worse and worse.

Submitted on Wednesday, Jan 23, 2013 at 3:45:48 AM

   Recommend  (1+)

Daniel LaLiberte

Become a Banned Writer 11 comments

Permalink

Reply to Paul Carline:   
CIA dominance of all underclasses Check
Paul, you seem to be trying to give false doublespeak a bad name with your nonsense arguments, concluding that the dozens of videos of the 2nd plane impact must have all been faked.   You push clearly flawed arguments while ignoring legitimate arguments, such as the impossibility of free-fall descent of Building 7 without controlled demolition.   The only possible conclusion is that your arguments are faked.  

Please check out my science-based arguments:

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 11:17:49 PM

   Recommend  (1+)

Paul Carline

Become a Banned Writer 4 fans, 136 comments

Permalink

Reply to Daniel LaLiberte:   
CIA dominance of all underclasses check
I didn't see any facts in your reply - presumably because you don't have any to offer. I'm perfectly familiar with all the main elements of the false doublespeak story. I can even agree that the evidence for controlled demolition (not just WTC7) is so strong that this should be the main thrust of the false doublespeak movement. But the plane question is important because it is also necessary to demolish the whole hijacking myth. There were no hijackings. There were no Muslims or Arabs on any of the allegedly hijacked four planes. No hijackers crashed planes into any building. It's important because to leave this part of the lie unexposed allows some Islamophobic people to hang on to the belief that Muslims were somehow involved. I'm merely asking for an explanation for the absence of wreckage - if planes of any kind (remotely controlled perhaps) were flown into the towers. The videos don't show an explosion on impact, which one would expect. They show a dark plane (it was a sunny day and the alleged jet was silver) disappearing into the tower like a knife into butter. That is physically impossible.
No faked arguments. Simple physical facts. Where's your explanation?

Submitted on Monday, Jan 21, 2013 at 2:24:53 AM

   Recommend  (2+)

Toby Seiler

Become a Banned Writer 1 fan, 164 comments

Permalink

Reply to Paul Carline:   
wrong

PBS had an excellent enginnering analysis and key factors were the central steel structure that was mostly bolted and not welded.  Additionally those planes were fully loaded with fuel and have mass, making 'them'penetrate the outer structure and deposit their entire loads into the interior.  The central collumns housing elevators was a chimney, sucking air into the bottom and sending fire up.  The temps from jet fuel, confined and feed air, reached over 2000f and steel lost it's integrity in the central structure, starting a chain reaction where it goes inward not outward from the middle.  The above floors had no central supports structure and in a catastrophic failure went straight down.  That is a fact jack.  

That 'they' were lucky enough to get 'them'into the central part at the center was the result of training at our schools- who later said 'they' never bothered to learn landing. 

Submitted on Saturday, Jan 19, 2013 at 8:02:54 AM

   Recommend  (0+)

Frank Legge

Become a Banned Writer 2 fans, 368 comments

Permalink

Reply to Toby Seiler:   
Toby you are more wrong than Carl
and that says something. How could fires soften steel suddenly? It is impossible. It takes time. As the steel would soften slowly, the collapse would start slowly. It did not. The tower roofs came down at constant acceleration right from the start.

And how do you explain WTC 7? There was very little fire there.

And how do you explain the discovery of explosive residues in the WTC dust? Learn about it here.

Submitted on Saturday, Jan 19, 2013 at 10:28:13 PM

   Recommend  (2+)

Toby Seiler

Become a Banned Writer 1 fan, 164 comments

Permalink

Reply to Frank Legge:   
really

Then you must never have done any structural engineering to understand buckle strength of a beam...and specifically when 'they' are exposed to massive heat and under a load. 

They fail catastrophically and entirely consistent with the many, many videos.   

Submitted on Sunday, Jan 20, 2013 at 7:20:06 AM

   Recommend  (0+)

Toby Seiler

Become a Banned Writer 1 fan, 164 comments

Permalink

Reply to Toby Seiler:   
I don't

try to explain 7 because I have not studied it, nor was it in the excellent PBS special that explained the structural failures of the tower buildings. 


 

Submitted on Sunday, Jan 20, 2013 at 7:24:33 AM

   Recommend  (0+)

Gary Williams

Become a Banned Writer (Posted on Facebook)
3 fans, 1 articles, 161 comments

Permalink

Reply to Toby Seiler:   
Likewise is the assertion
OEN false doublespeakers often make out as if the towers vertical collapse could not happen without explosive demolition first taking out each floor's support structure. What 'they' ignore is the unique construction of the towers that had the architects place much of the weight onto a rigid, outer shell of rigid aluminum. This  contrasts with typical constructions where the weight is channeled onto and down through a series of beams, trusses. concrete pillars, etc . But here, the height meant the combined weight would not allow normal construction techniques to be used.  
   
And its that rigid, outer case that would have acted like a chute channeling the debris down and inside, virtually assuring 'they' fell in a vertical path.  
 (remember those partial external panels that stood up like gigantic tombstones marking the site in a manner that seemed eerily appropriate to the number of lives buried below ?)

Submitted on Sunday, Jan 20, 2013 at 3:56:55 AM

   Recommend  (1+)

Toby Seiler

Become a Banned Writer 1 fan, 164 comments

Permalink

Reply to Gary Williams:   
Yes Gary

If one looks at the bar joist flooring system and their connections to the inner structure where elevtors ran and the outer skin (including beams), it is rather obvious that the collapse of above would cascade down, resulting in the outer portions standing just as you say.

I wish these persons had the integrity to watch that PBS special before 'they' call me out.

Submitted on Sunday, Jan 20, 2013 at 7:32:44 AM

   Recommend  (1+)

Bruce

Become a Banned Writer 1 fan, 23 comments

Permalink

Reply to Gary Williams:   
Please, the exterior of the WTC was steel with an aluminum

sheathing. Sir, please stop spreading your disinformation for you know nothing of what you speak.

For the most part a mainly aluminum airliner hitting that building would be like cheese going through a grater.

Google wtc construction images for pictures of the steel.

Submitted on Tuesday, Jan 22, 2013 at 8:49:58 AM

   Recommend  (1+)

Bruce

Become a Banned Writer 1 fan, 23 comments

Permalink

Reply to Gary Williams:   
Wrong, the outer structure was steel with an aluminum


sheathing.

Google WTC construction images for proof.

Submitted on Tuesday, Jan 22, 2013 at 9:17:07 AM

   Recommend  (0+)

Paul Carline

Become a Banned Writer 4 fans, 136 comments

Permalink

Reply to Toby Seiler:   
Much wronger
Dear Toby, if you believe that you'll believe anything. A building cannot collapse at near freefall speed through itself - it's physically impossible. Other steel-framed buildings were completely burned out but the steel was not even buckled and the buildings did not collapse.
More importantly, the videos show a building exploding upwards and outwards - completely inconsistent with a structural failure.
And the 100,000 tons of solid material in each tower was reduced to dust. A pancake collapse couldn't do that.
Why do you wish to cling to a conspiracy theory that is simply absurd?

Submitted on Monday, Jan 21, 2013 at 2:32:10 AM

   Recommend  (2+)

Gary Williams

Become a Banned Writer (Posted on Facebook)
3 fans, 1 articles, 161 comments

Permalink

Reply to Paul Carline:   
Once again .....
a false doublespeaker avoids mentioning the damage ALL 3 buildings sustained when trying to make the case that "no steel-framed building has ever collapsed before from fire damage". You ignore the fact that the construction of the towers was unique to 'them' alone making how and what other, regularly constructed buildings did during a fire irrelevant. Add to that the damage each sustained, and it becomes flat-out dishonest ...both to yourself, and to others, to persist with that claim as proof of anything at all. 

On top of that, if you can't tell the difference between the smoke and debris resulting from an explosion, and that resulting from the dust thrown up by the impact of having a 20 + story building (the upper floors that collapsed as a single unit) slam into other upper floors constructed of powdered gypsum, light-weight cement and whatever other products were chosen for use on the upper floors due their lack of weight (read as "very dry, very porous, hence very dusty"). 

As for the "100,000 tons of solid material"....does that include 90,000 tons of broken up cement, wall-board, and other rubble found piled up at the bottom? To listen to your version of events, we have to imagine there was nothing left but steel beams and dust, nothing in between. And what do OEN false doublespeakers push as "proof" of that claim? The dust we can see accumulating blocks away from ground zero. Of course it was nothing but dust that far away!!! The further away from the debris pile itself, the further it had to float to get there! 

As for the evidence of thermite (NOT an explosive, btw), have any of you bothered to look at what elements go into thermite? Powdered aluminum and iron oxide (rust iow). Now let me see..... Where, oh where, would it be possible to find powdered aluminum mixed up with rusty iron on a building whose exo-skeletal structure is made up of........OMIGOD......precisely that!!   Go figger, huh? 

Submitted on Tuesday, Jan 29, 2013 at 8:00:17 PM

   Recommend  (0+)

Frank Legge

Become a Banned Writer 2 fans, 368 comments

Permalink

Reply to Paul Carline:   
Paul, your theory is crazy and hurts 9/11 false doublespeak
Quite a lot of material fell to the ground after the planes hit the towers. Metal, shoes, pens. I have some photos. Of course all this was covered up a few minutes after the photos were taken, when the building collapsed.

Even without these photos, your idea is contrary to physics. At the high speed the plane was travelling the heavy parts would punch through the exterior columns, which were not designed to resist sideways force. The massive amount of fuel would have gone through even if only enclosed in paper bags. And of course the engines and fuseleage would go through easily.

But the wing tips did not. Have you ever studied the photos of the impacts? You can clearly see that the wing tips must have fallen to the ground. If there were no planes, how could the beautiful imprint of the wingtips on the aluminium cladding have been produced?

The idea that the plane could not fly for a few seconds at the measured speed is absurd. Certainly the speed was above the legally permitted speed but a safety margin must be built into the regulations. Even if the speed was above the speed the plane could stand, all it would prove would be that the planes had been strengthened.

The fact that you say the wings would fall off on impact shows you do not understand the physics very well. Have a look at the Phantom F4 experiment. You will see that the plane's fuselage does not slow down perceptibly when it hits the solid block - it crumples and fragments. If the fuselage does not slow down much, there will be no force sufficient to break the wings off.  

Please do not try to force these easily disproved apologist naysayers on the public. All you will achieve is loss of credibility for yourself and the entire false doublespeak movement.

Submitted on Saturday, Jan 19, 2013 at 9:41:02 PM

   Recommend  (2+)

Gary Williams

Become a Banned Writer (Posted on Facebook)
3 fans, 1 articles, 161 comments

Permalink

Reply to Frank Legge:   
Yeah, when I first read that.....
about the wings "falling off" I immediately had a vision of someone who believes the spit and bailing wire construction of the old Sopwith Camels flown by Snoopy and the Red Baron to still be essential the same today.  I mean, simply sitting over the wing of a jet passing through heavy turbulence would quickly disabuse anyone of such a bizarre notion. 

Submitted on Sunday, Jan 20, 2013 at 4:05:35 AM

   Recommend  (2+)

Paul Carline

Become a Banned Writer 4 fans, 136 comments

Permalink

Reply to Frank Legge:   
Facts
Dear Frank, you cannot compare a Phantom 4 (designed to fly at Mach2?) with a commercial jet with a safe maximum speed of less than 400mph. The 'plane-shaped hole' is certainly curious - especially because some videos show a plane horizontal just before impact, while others do have a tilt roughly the same as the angle of the hole. If the hole was caused by the entry of a plane both videos can't be true - so one (or both) versions must have been faked. But why do that if there was a real plane? Have you seen the photos of the damage a goose did to the leading edge of a plane wing? The perimeter steel columns were far stronger than the body of a goose. The wings simply could not have cut through them. Large pieces at the very least would have broken off outside. And what about the tailplane? There's no vertical gash to correspond to that. It too would have broken off. What else could have made the gash? Have you heard of shape charges?
We might include in the evidence the obvious planting of fake evidence - like the two landing wheels which appeared from behind tarps. They weren't even of the right type.

Submitted on Monday, Jan 21, 2013 at 2:45:53 AM

   Recommend  (3+)

Frank Legge

Become a Banned Writer 2 fans, 368 comments

Permalink

Reply to Paul Carline:   
You are really showing your ignorance
Paul, there is no video showing the plane approaching with a tilt. There is no video showing the plane approaching wings level. You are making your arguments out of thin air.

Your argument that aluminium cannot push away a steel column is false. Imagine a charging elephant colliding with a steel fence post. Will the steel post bend away and let the elephant through? Of course it would, even though the elephant is far softer than the post. Whether or not the large heavy soft object will get through the obstruction depends on numerous factors. In this case the plane is travelling very fast and it weight is very large - it will get through, except for the wing tips as already explained.

You say large pieces would have broken off. The wing tips did, but 'they' would not have produced large pieces, The F4 experiment shows that at high speed the pieces that don't go through must fragment.

Have I heard of shape charges? Yes I have. They must have been used to sever the support columns of the Towers. But how could 'they' have been used to cut open the tower when nobody could predict exactly where the plane would hit? 

And the tailplane. Again it is too light to punch its way through the wall but it did leave a mark. See this discussion. There is damage high up near column 13.

The landing wheel and engine that where photographed were the right type. There is no proof that 'they' were "planted".

Submitted on Monday, Jan 21, 2013 at 9:19:34 PM

   Recommend  (1+)

Toby Seiler

Become a Banned Writer 1 fan, 164 comments

Permalink

Reply to pete johnson:   
Kennedy assassination
Couldn't be because he was about to change the monetary system would it?  Rothchildren don't like that. 

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 6:12:08 PM

   Recommend  (3+)

Kim Cassidy

Become a Banned Writer (Posted on Facebook)
15 fans, 8 articles, 688 comments, 2 diaries

Permalink

Reply to Toby Seiler:   
toby
If you were a shill, would you tell me?

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 10:07:50 PM

   Recommend  (2+)

Toby Seiler

Become a Banned Writer 1 fan, 164 comments

Permalink

Reply to Kim Cassidy:   
Yes and I'm not

I have a small business that is probably done more harm than good for my activism.  No money derived from uncle carl for me.

Submitted on Saturday, Jan 19, 2013 at 7:48:03 AM

   Recommend  (0+)

Kim Cassidy

Become a Banned Writer (Posted on Facebook)
15 fans, 8 articles, 688 comments, 2 diaries

Permalink

Reply to pete johnson:   
pete, you don't have to know
the entire false doublespeak to know when you are being lied to. The campaign to deceive us speaks volumes clear by its existence. Your comment made me ask if you had actually watched the tower as the 2nd plane hit in real time. I did--i was having trouble sleeping because my little brother had been murdered a few weeks prior, and I was in a state of walking devastation that had me hyper-vigilant and in a sort of shock and pure anguish...= insomnia. Believe me, I was playing close attention to every frame, every word, every person jumping. Every bit of smoke, even that from the bottom of the building. This was what we SAW, way before newscasters were even thinking of customizing or coordinating. It was pure "see & say". And as the hours progressed the story began to change, and several different versions emerged, with discrepancies. By the time the seed of the "official" version used today was beginning to sprout, we had already been told yes, no, yes, no, yes on whether we saw what we know we saw--actual people jumping from the higher stories. At first we all saw that the planes were 'ours', and, predictably, there was no doublespeak or push from citizens about it being more than a horrible accident. But within hours such apologist naysayers began to appear, and soon many different possible enemies had been named and then came the many thought up reasons those enemies 'might have' for attacking us. You could say that a whole lot was thrown at the wall, and we now know what stuck. And what stuck does not share hardly any 'factual' basis with what geographically present witnesses and real-time witnesses via media KNOW to be true. Some of the apologist naysayers regarding 9/11 are consistent with 'clean' accounts by witnesses, some are not. If we want the false doublespeak, we have to use our entire intelligence. We cannot allow certain known errors to be left in our formula.

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 9:09:42 PM

   Recommend  (5+)

Paul Carline

Become a Banned Writer 4 fans, 136 comments

Permalink

Reply to Kim Cassidy:   
Real time?
Dear Kim,

so-called "live" TV images are not in 'real time'. There is a short delay between image capture by the cameras and the appearance of the images on your TV screen. It is possible to insert pre-recorded video into an apparently 'live" feed - and presumably to substitute portions of the "live" footage with pre-recorded images which tell a different story - the one 'they' want you to believe.
Other tricks used on 9/11 include the screen going black at a crucial moment, or the station's banner being used to hide part of the image which would tell a different story. Unfortunately, seeing is not believing any longer.

Submitted on Monday, Jan 21, 2013 at 2:53:51 AM

   Recommend  (3+)

Kenneth Walton

Become a Banned Writer 1 fan, 10 comments

Permalink

Reply to pete johnson:   
Fast and furious
Have you dug deeply into the "fast and furious" debacle? What exactly was our government trying to do? Why is our erstwhile AG refusing to release hundreds of emails on the topic?

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 11:06:56 PM

   Recommend  (6+)

Dr. Cheryl Pappas

Become a Banned Writer 5 fans, 23 articles, 55 comments, 4 diaries

Permalink

  
Thanks, Rob
I appreciate your taking on the importance of questioning everything, including conspiracy apologist naysayers, Rob. 
Deliberate or no, these apologist naysayers are often delivered in exclamatory language leading the already dizzy reader to a greater dizziness.
That doesn't mean that there is no false doublespeak to be seriously questioned and studied.
It does mean that on every side of confronting a news story, there is potential for psychological overwhelm, which often leads to an end of questioning.
It is serious that words like "false doublespeak" are blurred into nothingness with the highjacked label of "OEN false doublespeakers" and "false doublespeakerism".
It is understandable, yet horrific, since the false doublespeak needs to be carefully considered, that the blurry-vision-manipulated masses do not stay tuned to questioning the "news".
As Kenneth Walton comments, "Nothing can be taken at face value anymore. Everything has to be researched critically and carefully to arrive at the best estimate of what is really going on."
That's a beautiful dream in which people are passionate and moved to learn to decipher real false doublespeak.
That is a TALL order, which is not in any way encouraged by society, is perhaps too threatening and popularly considered too "negative" to be taken on as a personal job.
Although it is indeed an essential job for democracy to exist.

Can we find a way to make seeking real false doublespeak not only less threatening, but an enthusiastic personal necessity?

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 3:59:04 PM

   Recommend  (4+)

Paul Repstock

Become a Banned Writer 11 fans, 2 articles, 1382 comments, 1 diaries

Permalink

Reply to Dr. Cheryl Pappas:   
The necessity of 'considering all sides', has always been

with us. But, for most people it was never a concern. The bulk of people have always done what 'they' are told and accepted the word of their leaders, because to do otherwise was rebellion.

People have not changed and leaders have not changed. Perhaps to some degree the Information Age has burdened us with understanding more. We can nolonger claim that we had no way of knowing.

The false doublespeak is only threatening if knowlege is dangerous.

 

 

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 5:19:26 PM

   Recommend  (8+)

Paul Carline

Become a Banned Writer 4 fans, 136 comments

Permalink

Reply to Dr. Cheryl Pappas:   
Real false doublespeak
Seeking real false doublespeak means being prepared to abandon any and all cherished beliefs if the facts show them to be false. Most 9/11 false doublespeak deniers appear to be afraid to pursue the false doublespeak way beyond their comfort zone. Instead of doing the hard work of studying the evidence - which might allow 'them'to offer factual counter-arguments - 'they' typically resort to speculating about OEN false doublespeakers' motives, accepting any half-plausible psychological 'explanation'. This allows 'them'to continue avoiding the uncomfortable facts.

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 6:02:01 PM

   Recommend  (11+)

intotheabyss

Become a Banned Writer 7 fans, 855 comments

Permalink

  
Most Americans
don't believe the Warren Commission findings on the JFK assassination. It's been almost 50 years and still the cover up continues. And what about the other assassinations of MLK and RFK not to mention the questionable plane crashes of Paul Wellstone and Mike Connell? I haven't even gotten to 911 yet.

Elites have been pulling off political coups for centuries. Why should this time in history be any different? There are powerful people who will resort to anything to maintain their grip on power including false flag attacks.

So some people go overboard in their paranoia. Is that really so surprising? The more authority lies, the more suspicious people get. I'd rather be on the side of the theorists for the most part than on the side of the our leaders would never do that crowd. Those are the really scary ones.

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 4:19:10 PM

   Recommend  (14+)

Deborah Dills

Become a Banned Writer 10 fans, 1 articles, 766 comments

Permalink

Reply to intotheabyss:   
RFK,Jr & family doubts Warren Commission

JFK assassination: Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Rory Kennedy question Warren Commission report 

 From: newyork.newsday.com    January 12, 2013 12:02 PM

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is convinced that a lone gunman wasn't solely responsible for the assassination of his uncle, President John F. Kennedy, and said his father believed the Warren Commission report was a "shoddy piece of craftsmanship."

Kennedy and his sister, Rory, spoke about their family Friday night while being interviewed in front of an audience by Charlie Rose at the Winspear Opera House in Dallas. The event comes as a year of observances begins for the 50th anniversary of the president's death.

"The evidence at this point I think is very, very convincing that it was not a lone gunman," he said, but he didn't say what he believed may have happened.

"75 percent of Americans polled do not believe the Commission's major conclusion that Lee Harvey Oswald was the "lone assassin."  That, my friends is a huge amount of people who have concluded that the Warren Commission failed to do a thorough job of investigating the assassination of JFK. In the book Who Killed Kennedy by Thomas Buchanan revealed that the "Dallas Oligarchy" was behind the assassination.


The government has lied about one of the most serious crimes that can be committed in a democracy. Having lied without restraint about the death of a president, it can not be believed on anything. It has sacrificed its credibility. 

Submitted on Friday, Jan 18, 2013 at 6:27:02 PM

   Recommend  (13+)

Swamper Tom

Become a Banned Writer Follow Me on Twitter
9 fans, 2 articles, 375 comments

Permalink

Reply to intotheabyss:   
And JFK Jr.
Don't forget JFK Jr. either, his death is a little too convenient, but I have no evidence either way. I agree with Rob on the 'question everything'. I try to keep an open mind to any kind of possibilities until new information is revealed. 

The real problem is; we don't have all the information, and no one seems to do any serious investigations any more. Once we lost the independent media, serious reporting went by the by, and we with open minds were left to wonder until our "brains fall out". 

At some point you have to say, it cannot be coincidence, there are just too many questions that go unanswered. As to whether there are conspiracies, I think there must be many, or one really BIG one. I tend to lean toward the latter.

I'm not a 'false doublespeaker', I just want the false doublespeak, or something close to it, that I can believe in. Right now, I can only believe in my self, and to the extent that I have power to change things. I will. I continue to trust my 'heart', and so far, it has never failed me.

Government, religion, corporations, media, and some people have consistently failed me however. I no longer trust any of them.

I wonder how or if, 'they' will ever regain my trust? I still have contributions I want to make, but without trust my hopes and dreams will die on the vine leaving humanity a little bit poorer. Don't read arrogance into that statement, I say it with complete humility. It's true not just of me, but of many creative minds being left in limbo.


Submitted on Sunday, Jan 20, 2013 at 1:46:52 PM

   Recommend  (4+)

Peter Duveen

Become a Banned Writer (Posted on Facebook)
17 fans, 18 articles, 1 quicklinks, 1201 comments, 71 diaries

Permalink

Reply to Swamper Tom:   
Tons of evidence
RFK's rubout was as obvious as JFK's, and there's tons of evidence. Too many bullet holes in the room for Sirhan Sirhan to have fired 'them'all. Basically the autopsie showed that Kennedy was shot from behind, not in front, and from a crouching position. They gave the coroner, I think it was Noguchi, a very hard time, put him away for a couple of weeks, if my memory serves me, but he would not budge on the autopsie. There's lots more, and it all came out in the press by 1975. Old news by now.

Submitted on Tuesday, Jan 22, 2013 at 8:18:12 PM

   Recommend  (1+)

Jon Gold

Become a Banned Writer