Matthew Lewis

Aerosols sprayed from rooftops and vehicles on the ground is in no way comparable to what people call "chemtrails" and actually does more to show that they wouldn't be spraying something from 30,000 feet when it is far easier to achieve the desired effect from the ground. Still no evidence that what we see in the sky is anything other than contrails

I don't really care. I wasn't talking about WTC 7. does this mean you're conceding the nonsense about WTC 6?

The above is a not correct. The footage was NOT filmed at 9:04. The video shows someone was speaking to Tom Clancy. Years ago when Jack White brought this nonsense up I searched through the online video archives for that day and found the footage in question. The footage was from 11:53, AFTER both tower collapses when they were reshowing footage from the earlier collapses. The screen capture with "voice of Tom Clancy" was clearly showing the first collapse. The dust cloud is from that collapse. Here is the post http://educationforu...285#entry119397 The link in that post to the video archive still works so you can watch for yourself. Moderator Note: I have edited the above post to remove ambiguity; the post could be misunderstood to mean that Matt was saying that Steven had lied; this is not what the post meant. It meant that Matt asserts the statement by Chris Bollyn was a "lie". To ensure that the ambiguity was removed, I have edited the post to read "not correct".

You'll probably ignore this but the above two statements do not really go together. Yes, most USAF bases have radar but NOT the kind of radar in the first statement. An AF base will have approach radar for the airfield and usually that is about it. This radar is short range and designed for approach control for landings at that area. Space radar is located at only a few facilities and is very different. It does not and can not track aircraft. Typically they use the PAVE PAWS or a similar system http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PAVE_PAWS http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Force_Space_Surveillance_System

Citation Mr. Gaal? ====================== http://progressiveal...five-obama.html Len Colby said... As an undercover CIA agent, I professionally debunk government conspiracies on discussion forums. It's my profession to lie and to know when other people are lying. Sarah Palin, like most Republicans, is a xxxx. ========================= xxxx xxxx, Pants on Fire! <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WSkv_29Rncg&feature=related">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WSkv_29Rncg&feature=related And the proof that is him and not somebody pretending to be him? Such a mature response by the way. It says volumes. ######################################### COLBY'S TROLLING BUDDY POSTING SAME BLOG PAGE LESS THAN 6 hours before, (guess he Lamson) sent email to Colby ,who (Colby) also wanted to weight in/against Palin. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Craig Lamson said... Republicans are lying, evil fascists, who are determined to destroy the USA. Vote for Barack Obama and save America! September 4, 2008 1:42 PM And the proof this "buddy" was who he said he was? I could go to multiple forums any time I want and post anything I want under the name of Steven Gaal. It wouldn't mean you posted it would it? Oh that's right you don't have any proof.

It might be different in the US but in the UK you could never win an election after slagging off 47% of the voters. It is probably true that about 30% of the electorate would never vote for your party, but never 47%. If that was the case, it would not be worth standing. One of the things we know about elections in recent years is the importance of the "floating voter" that is often close to 40% of the electorate. It is actually 46% of the US population that do not pay income-tax. However, that includes a large number of retirees, students and members of the military not paying income-tax. Is he really not interested in these people like he said in the video? ("My job is not to worry about these people.") Yet, he did not correct these comments following the release of the video. As Obama pointed out yesterday, he was "the president of all the people, not just those who voted for him". His comments about the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians is factually incorrect and will make it impossible to be a peace-broker in the region. That probably makes no difference to most of the US electorate but it does mean a lot to the international community. It would seem that Romney is no better informed about foreign policy than Bush. It reminds me of an incident that took place many years ago. I found an article written by Keith Joseph, a Conservative politician, in his youth, saying the the role of the party was to help the rich to stay rich. He was a government minister at the time. When he asked for questions I read out part of the article and asked him if he still believed this. He looked around him to see if the press was present than said: "yes, everyword of it". Of course, this was a time before the video phone. I'd be willing to bet the vast majority of that 47% don't pay attention to politics or news and most of them won't vote anyway. Turnout even for presidential elections is usually depressingly low.

Citation Mr. Gaal? ====================== http://progressiveal...five-obama.html Len Colby said... As an undercover CIA agent, I professionally debunk government conspiracies on discussion forums. It's my profession to lie and to know when other people are lying. Sarah Palin, like most Republicans, is a xxxx. ========================= xxxx xxxx, Pants on Fire! <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WSkv_29Rncg&feature=related">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WSkv_29Rncg&feature=related And the proof that is him and not somebody pretending to be him? Such a mature response by the way. It says volumes.

And you prove my theory by continuing the childish font, color and size changes. Thank you. So, in other words you don't really know, you're just guessing. Ooh! Bolded even! Why couldn't they? Do people on their own pay for/maintain the bunk sites?

Why not? For the most part it is true.

You have a habit of making up facts, post a link to this supposed blog and my supposed response. Even IF true, how do we know it wasn't a joke? Or that it wasn't somebody posing as him? Should we believe everything posted on the Internet?

Almost forgot this bit. As if I was only referring to a single post of yours when a quick glance at nearly every thread you've been involved in has the multiple font size and color changes.

Translation: I like to make it harder for others to read. It makes me feel superior in some way. Translation: I'm lazy and can't bother to use multiple quotes. Plus that would make it too easy for others to read. Translation: Of course I have no proof. All I have is that he posts in opposition to me and how dare somebody think differently than me! Here's some examples of my paranoia sprinkled with accusation of pedophilia. Yes, I'll stoop that low. You've made me remember why I hardly come here anymore. Before you there were others that seemed to regard this place as their personal dumping ground blog. It is clear you aren't interested in discussion, only being right.

You didn't answer the question. And you're still writing so it looks like a 10 year old girl. You avoided that question too. Here's another question you'll probably avoid: why can't you use the quotes on the forum software? You can change font colors 10 times within a post but you can't click a quote button? You really are just trying to make everything harder to read aren't you?

So because someone else in your opinion diverts threads it is ok to attack the messenger? He made a statement of opinion based on your posting time. So what? What's with the constant bolding, and font color change? Reminds me of what my sister used to do when she was a preteen. Any actual purpose to it besides making everything harder to read and follow?

Your opinion was they became weaker? He's tired of dealing with what has essentially turned into your private blog? I have yet to see ANY proof that he or anyone else here is paid to post yet this seems like an accusation

Those SUPPOSED 25 rules of disinformation and 8 traits of disinformationalist (is that even a word?) are basic traits that apply to ANYONE posting on the internet. It seems more like an attack against a user. If you can brand someone as spreading "disinformation" or being paid to post you can casually dismiss anything they say. Rather, shouldn't one discuss claims based on their own merits?

And now I see it has already been mentioned in the JFK forum. http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=19212&st=0

Update: confirmed on the deep politics forum https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?10272-Jack-White

http://www.legacy.com/obituaries/dfw/obituary.aspx?n=jack-d-white&pid=158121627&fhid=4250 Jack D. White, 85, passed away Monday, June 18, 2012. Funeral: 3:30 p.m. Thursday in Mount Olivet Chapel. Interment: Mount Olivet Cemetery. Visitation: 2:30 p.m. Thursday at Mount Olivet Funeral Home. Memorials: Those desiring to honor Jack's memory may contribute to a TCU Journalism Department scholarship fund or a charity of choice. Jack was born Jan. 17, 1927, in San Angelo, moving to Fort Worth with his parents, John Nathan White and Billie Lorena Dumas White, shortly after his birth. Graduating from Carter-Riverside High School in 1944, he worked briefly for the Fort Worth Press covering high school sports under the legendary sports editor H.H. "Pop" Boone. He enlisted in the U.S. Navy during World War II and while serving attended Stanford University in the ROTC program. Discharged in 1946, Jack entered Texas Christian University, graduating in 1949 with a B.A. in journalism and began an advertising career as copywriter and art director at Yates Advertising Agency. In 1954, he joined Witherspoon and Ridings Public Relations Agency, which later became Witherspoon and Associates, as the firm's first art director. During his 27 years with the agency he rose to vice president, executive art director, personnel manager and part owner. He specialized in design and photography. Although he had photographed the city since the 1950s, he began collecting Fort Worth photographs seriously in 1972 when Witherspoon was planning the 100th anniversary for one of its clients and he was in charge of acquiring copies of historical prints of Fort Worth. After the event he took care to preserve all the exhibit materials and during the next 20 years he reproduced other client's historical photographs and took hundreds of pictures to add to the collection. Jack retired from Witherspoon in 1981 and formed his own company, Jack White Enterprises, specializing in free-lance art and photography. In 1984, taking two partners, the firm's name changed to VJS Companies. In 1991, he again became a sole proprietor. Because of his interest in Fort Worth history, he spearheaded a group of local historians and launched an internet website, which he named "The Way We Were," to display and research old photos of the city. Another of Jack's interest has been the study of the John F. Kennedy assassination, serving as a photographic consultant to the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Assassinations during its hearings, as well a consultant on the JFK film. He produced two videotapes on his photographic studies of the assassination and developed a slide lecture, while contributing his research to books and professional journals. Jack's collection of JFK assassination books and materials and his old Fort Worth photographs have been donated to UTA Library's Special Collections where they are accessible to those interested. Jack married the former Sue Benningfield in 1969 and in 1977 they were instrumental in reactivating their neighborhood home owners association. He served as president for several years. He painted many works of art which hang in private collections and adorn the walls of his modern home, as well as a large painting of the Fort Worth skyline on display at the Fort Worth Public Library. He was an avid TCU alumnus and until last year had not missed a home football or basketball game since 1946. He enjoyed yard work and raising tomatoes, which he happily supplied his friends. Survivors: Wife, Sue; cousins, Pat O'Neal of Fort Worth, Laura O'Neal Tauzel of Arlington, Larry O'Neal of Fort Worth, Nancy Robbins of Denton and Shirley Hurley of Haltom City; and a host of wonderful friends. Published in Star-Telegram on June 20, 2012 Read more here: http://www.legacy.com/obituaries/dfw/obituary.aspx?n=jack-d-white&pid=158121627&fhid=4250#storylink=cpy

Wrong http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Bin_Laden_family_flight +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^o^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ September 20, 2001: Not All Passengers on ‘Bin Laden Flight’ Are Properly Interviewed or Accounted For A private plane picks up Saudis who have gathered in Boston and flies them to Paris, then ultimately to Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Because most of the passengers on board are relatives of Osama bin Laden, the 9/11 Commission calls this the “so-called bin Laden flight.” The commission claims there are 26 passengers on board, three of them security personnel. They further report that “22 of the 26… were interviewed by the FBI. Many were asked detailed questions.” However, the commission does not answer how many were not asked detailed questions, or were not questioned at all. [9/11 Commission, 7/24/2004, pp. 557] However, Craig Unger, author of the book House of Bush, House of Saud, publishes the flight manifest during the same week as the 9/11 Commission’s final report is released, and this list contains 29 names (including the three security personnel), not 26. [Craig Unger website, 7/22/2004] The 2005 book Al-Qaeda Will Conquer by Guillaume Dasquié also makes note of this three-person discrepancy. [Financial Times, 4/27/2005] Thanks for backing me up. It was said "no questions asked" and clearly 22 of the 26 were in fact questioned. Though one must wonder what they thought extended family members would even know or what else should have been done besides questioning. If somebody commits a crime do you go and lock up all their cousins?

Wrong http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Bin_Laden_family_flight

from your own link http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2010/01/04/239793/Chinook-computer-was-39positively-dangerous39-say-newly-disclosed-MoD.htm

It took quite a bit longer than that. Here's the official NTSB report. http://www.ntsb.gov/publictn/2000/aab0001.htm Last attempted contact was at 0933 EDT (Eastern Daylight Time). They tried to contact them for the next four and a half minutes. The first jet vectored to intercept reached them at 0952 CDT (Central Daylight Time), which is equivalent to 1052 EDT, which is nearly an hour and 20 minutes (because of the time zone change) after loss of contact. It took the FAA more than 20 minutes just to notify NORAD of a problem. It should also be noted that the first jet to reach Stewart was already airborne for another purpose, not scrambled to do so and not dedicated to air defense. The time zone change throws a lot of people off. They mention it in note 7 at the end "About 1010 EDT, the accident airplane crossed from the EDT zone to the CDT zone in the vicinity of Eufaula, Alabama."