Devvy goes off the deep end!

Devvy goes off the deep end! Tests positive for conspiranoia!



HOW DARE FAMILIES & SURVIVORS OF 9/11 QUESTION GOVERNMENT VERSION!

The New Pearl Harbor

I have finished reading The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions about the Bush Administration and 9/11 (200 pgs) by Professor David Ray Griffin. This book is quite different than Crossing the Rubicon (657 pgs). On page 15 of Crossing, author Michael Ruppert comes right now with this statement: "...the evidence will inexorably prove our case: that the United States government not only had complete foreknowledge of the attacks on September 11th, it also needed them and deliberately facilitated them, and even helped plan and execute them using techniques long understood in the world of covert operations." This is a very strong statement and before one writes it off as looney conspiracy stuff, they should read this book backed up with 900 foot note sources.

As for The New Pearl Harbor, the author himself says in the introduction that until spring of 2003, he "...had not looked at any of the evidence. I was vaguely aware that there were people, at least on the Internet, who were offering evidence against the official account of 9/11 and were suggesting a revisionist account...I did not take the time to find their web sites...I had been studying the history of AMerican expansionism and imperialism quite intensely since 9/11, so I knew that the U.S. government has fabricated "incidents" as an excuse to go to war several times before. Nevertheless, although the thought did cross my mind that 9/11 might likewise have been arranged, I did not take this possibility seriously. It seemed to me simply beyond belief that the Bush administration - even the Bush - administration - would not do such a heinous thing."

By the end of the book, you will see that Professor Griffin's own research led him to have a completely different take on 9/11 with many unanswered questions because the official story and evidence that has been gathered doesn't wash. This man is highly educated and the facts as we know them, along with the physical evidence available, have convinced Griffin that things did not happen the way they have been sold to the American people. He doesn't accuse anyone of anything, but does come to some conclusions that most Americans don't want to hear. He brings the reader the facts and at the end, they will have just as many questions as he does about what really happened.

Griffin has been Professor of Philosophy of Religion at the Claremont School of Theology in California for over 30 years and has authored more than 20 books. Sounds like a real wacko to me. While Crossing the Rubicon painstakingly brings the reader from the genesis of "peak oil" through 9/11 with precision, Professor Griffin approaches that day in a slightly different manner. In razor sharp style, Griffin brings into focus why a real independent investigation must be undertaken. He brings out even more questions about the official account in a very balanced, intelligent, comprehensive manner - including why Rudy Guiliani should questioned under oath about the events leading up to and including that day.

For those about to launch more hate mail excoriating me for bringing up this subject, I would ask these angry GOP Bush faithful to ask themselves how come five of the 19 so-called hijackers have been proven to be alive and wondering why their names and faces are on the FBI list of dead terrorists? How could the FAA, NORAD, the CIA and FBI all be so incredibly incompetent - all at the same time? There is no proof a commercial airliner hit the Pentagon. More than likely it was a military plane, a "friendly," which is why the Pentagon's sophisticated missile defense system didn't fire at the incoming plane. If Flight 77 didn't hit the Pentagon, where are the passengers? Based on the military exercises going on that day, many of us believe we know what happened, but only a truly independent investigation with a lot of high level government officials put under oath, including Bush, is going to give us the answers.

....................................

For the rest of the story, click on the link at the top of this post.

Sadly, Devvy Kidd displays the same faulty thinking as master huckster Dave vonKleist and others. After reading a book, conspiranoia took hold in her mind. Notice that she did not mention any fact-checking or attempts to verify the info in the books (Pearl Harbor & Rubicon). The conspiracy theories fit her already twisted views. With this being the case, the 'facts' contained within are accepted uncritically. Devvy helped push the silly idea that there was not a crater in front of the Alfred P. Murrah federal building (OKC). in a manner similar to her 'research' regarding 9/11, she 'knew' there was not a crater because she saw the claim in a video! Again, info is accepted uncritically if it fits her worldview. Anything to the contrary is met with a demand for 100% proof instead of a common sense preponderance of the evidence.

Of course, David Ray Griffin was torn to shreds by Chip Berlet in a debate earlier this year.

The New Pearl Harbor: A Debate On A New Book That Alleges The Bush Administration Was Behind The 9/11 Attacks

1. Audio link

2. Transcript link

http://www.independent-media.tv/item.cfm?f...rican%20Century

Please, no conspiranoiac responses. Your half-*ssed 'efforts' have shamed the 9/11 victims. Only respond if you have read the entire transcript and/or listened to the entire program.

[Texans 4 Furors]

Ok, no one has the answers. So who then? Who ISN'T a shill or a disinformation agent? Who? Everyone sucks. What now? I've looked at most of your posts and you seem to know a lot about who is full of BS but you never really weigh in with your "research" (your quotes, not mine). I'm not being a jerk. You seem to know a few things. But come on, man. You know as well as I that I could start strapping the "tin foil" hat on you seeing as your signature quotes Bill Cooper. I think we both know why I wouldn't do that.

[Scribbler1]

Tex,
It's tough, ain't it? No matter what you say or think you know, there will always be someone accusing you of being a "conspiracy theorist" or someone who sports one of those fashionable tinfoil hats that are all the rage these days.

I usually find THEY are the "disinformation agents" and they are very easy to spot. It's the difference between someone who says they don't believe what you say and tell you WHY they don't believe it, and the person who IMMEDIATELY charges you with being a nutcase or a fool. It is the difference bewteen the reasoned counterargument and the baseless slur.
You also notice that the biggest mouths who throw around "conspiracy theory" like rice at a wedding are generally supporters of the status quo. Case in point, the Bush supporter who casually dismisses any case for the possibility of election fraud ONLY because Bush won.

Ignore them and just grab all the raw data you can.

[Texans 4 Furors]

I agree but don't think this necessarily describes Stone.

[OberonDOtherseid]

Some things are just not worth a response Scribbler. Maybe more conservatives should just let the stories by conspiracy theorists throw out just slide and not bother to respond at all, how do you respond to something when it is so far off the radar of culpability that it is impossible to explain why because it's laughable and almost pitiful to read? Plenty of responses from those who oppose me and those like Dieval come back with just as many one liners of "You're just a Sean Hanity slave" and alike. We both do it, both sides. Most of the information that is offered is the writings of another person who has an opinion, not a source, an opinion on a bog site or a group op people with a bias and an agenda who all have an opinion. Cutting and pasting blog entries is also frustrating to reason with.

I guess its no harm to just let them blog on and even if nothing that is declared as fact or predicted comes to fruition is ever noted as a miscalculation or wrong, they're happy in their own world believing so. Right? The one thing I have noticed with bog sites, on both sides of the coin is redundancy and repeating nonsense has it's own way of making things reality when not and has a damaging potetial to re write history and our future. In my own opinion, of course.

[Texans 4 Furors]

I don't fall for the left/right phony debate. You people just ignore truths. Period. Anything that conficts with your emotions must be ignored. That 's the gist of what youy are saying. When you watch CNN the morning of the OKC bombing and for over an hour they talk about FEDS removing OTHER BOMBS, it is going to make you ask questions when they fail to mention it EVER AGAIN. Forgive people for having a memory.

[OberonDOtherseid]

Texans, when you can argue my point without creating a false dilema and using ad hominem I might respond, you're the one using caps to expound your emotion. until then you're not adding squat to this discussion and consider yourself ignored.

Funny how the only thing you believe on national news is what you want to believe and leave out all the rest, eh?

[Texans 4 Furors]

What point? Facts are facts. You, Hannity, Franken , Bush , Kerry DISTORT facts, spin them, or ignore them altogether to fit your world view. The key is RESETTING your worldview and stop emotionally attaching yourself to monkeysuited, globalist shills

Guys,

Umm, a few things...

1. Thanks for the posts.

2. Most (all?) of them would have been better suited as PMs.

"Only respond if you have read the entire transcript and/or listened to the entire program."

Please try to keep it on topic in here. This is not a general topic for your generic arguments from countless other posts..

[OberonDOtherseid]

No prob, StoneWT.

[Scribbler1]

Originally posted by OberonDOtherseid, Some things are just not worth a response Scribbler. Maybe more conservatives should just let the stories by conspiracy theorists throw out just slide and not bother to respond at all, how do you respond to something when it is so far off the radar of culpability that it is impossible to explain why because it's laughable and almost pitiful to read?

That of course goes for both sides. Insane theories from either side will eventually lose steam and disappear. However, sometimes they are too glaring to pass up a rebuttal and that starts the ball rolling.
I agree that if we all ignored half of what we saw we'd ALL have a better time of it.

Plenty of responses from those who oppose me and those like Dieval come back with just as many one liners of "You're just a Sean Hanity slave" and alike. We both do it, both sides.

And the right dragging out the tinfoil hats and (a term I have grown to loathe) "conspiracy theory". Both sides do it alright, but that should be stopped BY both sides. I had an argument with Dieval a while back about that very thing in regards to election fraud. My point was that although he saw conspiracy theory in some posts, not ALL posts were so easily dismissed and it's just a cheap shot to toss out that repulsive label to diminish an entire argument. The same would be true of blanket condemnation of the conservative posters as well, based on a few selected posts. 9 out of 10 posts are reasonable and trashing the whole lot based on the 10th indefensible post is a classic straw man argument.

I guess its no harm to just let them blog on and even if nothing that is declared as fact or predicted comes to fruition is ever noted as a miscalculation or wrong, they're happy in their own world believing so. Right? The one thing I have noticed with bog sites, on both sides of the coin is redundancy and repeating nonsense has it's own way of making things reality when not and has a damaging potetial to re write history and our future. In my own opinion, of course.

I disagree. There IS harm in just "blogging" on this forum. If you don't state you are posting an opinion it can lead to mistaken conclusions and a lot of unnecessary arguments about something which was not arguable in the first place. The harm in "blogging" opinions and pretending they're facts diminishes all the time and effort most of the members put in to backing up what they say with real sources.
I believe we have our opinions and we have hard facts, and quoting the opinions of others as facts has no place here.

As to your second point I agree. A lie repeated often enough becomes truth.

[Scribbler1]

Originally posted by StoneWT, Guys, Umm, a few things... 1. Thanks for the posts. 2. Most (all?) of them would have been better suited as PMs. "Only respond if you have read the entire transcript and/or listened to the entire program." Please try to keep it on topic in here. This is not a general topic for your generic arguments from countless other posts..

Agreed, and guilty as charged.

I read the whole article linked and honestly came away with a sense of Deja Vu more than anything else. This is essentially the same information and the same charges that have been floating around on THIS forum for over a year at least. It is asking the question of "what really happened" while presupposing something other than what was reported actually is the truth.
This goes back to Texans 4 Furors' question "Ok, no one has the answers. So who then?" which I agree with. I hear charges but nothing to indicate anyone actually has the truth, or at least how to find out the truth. And by truth I don't mean a book or article by someone just parroting the same allegations.
Personally I am inclined to believe almost all of the official version because that's all I have to go with. The other side says it's all a bunch of lies, and while I can easily believe the government lies to its people on a daily basis I don't hear anything concrete to contradict the "official" version.

[Texans 4 Furors]

Agree with a lot of that . But even though things have "floated around the forum" doesn't mean anything. The fact that CNN and other local news agencies reported bombs being removed by FEDS directly after the bombing @ OKC IS DOCUMENTED. There is no refuting it. Period. The question is why did they tell us that. If it was a mistake why don't they just say that instead of simply suppressing the subject and writing off people as "Conspiracy theorists". This is just one of thousands of anomalies that I can think of. No body has the power (IMP) to explain every detail. Buy 2+2 does not equal 5 no matter what the news tells you or what you've been led to believe.

[kharmajunkie]

"The one thing I have noticed with bog sites, on both sides of the coin is redundancy and repeating nonsense has it's own way of making things reality when not and has a damaging potetial to re write history and our future. In my own opinion, of course."


As does FOX. For example, how come they're calling everyone that we're fighting in Iraq "terrorists"? That seems to be their preferred term. Is that really the correct word to be using though? I find that it kind of dilutes the meaning and belittles victims of terrorism while serving as a prime fear tactic. (..terrorists..oh my)
I'm picking on FOX at the moment but it applies to all the news networks and many of them would fail to live up to the journalistic standards that you're setting for the blog set. There's nothing wrong with standards as long as they're applied
evenly.

[kharmajunkie]

"Plenty of responses from those who oppose me and those like Dieval come back with just as many one liners of "You're just a Sean Hanity slave" and alike. We both do it, both sides."
(Oberon)


Thanks for quoting me, I only call you guys out for being RNC/FOX "slaves" because I recognize statements you, Dieval,
et all make from various FOX "newscasts" throughout the day.
Sometimes I think that you guys all get an Email breifing from
the home office every morning and practice your pithy comments
for the watercooler on here first. (ok I do that too though)

I realize that I'm beating this horse dead now so in the future I'm going to do a simple refute and stick to the thread topic; if I don't I'm going to report myself soon. I'm also going to start a thread solely for the purpose of this very argument. (Sources, journalistic standards, etc) That way threads won't be inadvertantly hijacked by as many side arguments.

[PatrickHenry]

The problems lie in the "anomalies" unexplained by the official version(TOV). Most of America, but not the rest of the world, has fully bought into TOV. However when questions are raised, TOV adherents eyes glaze over or the angry retort, "conspiracy theorist" is thrown.

Why can we not have a serious examination of the anomalies? IMO, it is because the subsequent events have led America deeper and deeper into the swamp. And the trigger event is 9/11. If TOV9/11 begins to unravel, the unthinkable is revealed. The UNTHINKABLE! Meaning it is too painful to consider.

Stone, you have shown yourself to be a man of some insight and a willingness to consider the unthinkable. On the other hand you called my friend, roxdog(now banned) a troll. For raising issues you have dismissed. roxdog was no troll, even if he often got too excited.

Perhaps we should list the anomalies inconsistent with TOV and try to get to the bottom of this, rather than going round and round with accusations.

Oberon, please do not say "you are ignored" to a member. There ARE members whose arguments I ignore(not you) but I do so without public insult. Can we keep this forum impersonal and stay with the debatable stuff?

Can we agree that not everything known about 9/11 fits into TOV box?

[Zeebadee]

"Well, I think there are a number of places where Professor Griffin and I agree. We agree the Bush administration is not telling the whole truth. We agree there are a number of unanswered questions. Let's be clear that both of us want more investigation, more revelations and hold the Bush administration accountable."

People don't seem to understand that the truth can be somewhere between the official version of 9/11 and the claim that the official version is a total lie.

There are major problems with the OV that we just don't seem to be able to get answers to. For example, were there really large numbers of puts bought on airline stocks just before the attack? This should be an easy question to answer, but we can't seem to get anything definitive. I've seen reports that go both ways, who are we to believe?

While I can accept that the towers could be brought down by aircraft hits, I can't believe that a 757 crashing into the Pentagon would leave a hole 18' across. Those two massive engines would have had to hit something, yet there's nothing that shows any corresponding damage from them.

Something is clearly wrong with the official version of events. One doesn't have to be a conspiracy addict to see that we aren't being told the truth.

[Osborn F Enready]

Stone, excellent post, excellent topic, and boy is it nice to see people who are waking up to face the facts.

Thanks for sharing, and needless to say, I strongly agree with all of that header post, and the theories in the book, as I have been keeping up with most of them on Michael Ruperts site.
Once reading that, and seeing the proof that he lays out, it is time to break out the AMPP website ( http://www.mega.nu:8080/ampp/ ), and really enrich your ability to free think outside the propaganda box (TV) and see what is really happening. The volumes of proof are on that site, as well as many other sites now uniting to wake people up to the fact our government, has long ago been hijacked, and is heading straight for a course of Police State.

By the way, tin foil hats are coming back in fashion with the retro movement. Don't be late, get yours today! LOL

If you aren't a conspiracy theorist, you are a coincidence theorist, and it seems odd one side has all the proof and its called conspiracy.

[Scribbler1]

Originally posted by Texans 4 Furors, I agree but don't think this necessarily describes Stone.

Sorry, Tex. I must have missed this post. I am not in any way suggesting Stone is a conspiracy theorist or a nutcase. I was suggesting when people imply others are those things they are the suspect ones and the defenders of the status quo.

[Texans 4 Furors]

I figured that. I agreed with you and just wanted to make it clear.