Dawn Meredith Posted June 30, 2006 Share Posted June 30, 2006 [quote name='Jack White' date='Jun 21 2006, 04:36 PM' post='66095'] Colby shows he is incapable of understanding, when he said: "Much as I detest Bush, Fetzer's call for a military take over in the US is truly sickening and should be condemned by all members of this forum. " Fetzer was calling for a TAKEOVER BY THE PEOPLE...not by the MILITARY! When someone is 180 degrees from what is stated, they have mental problems or an agenda. Colby should be condemned by all members of this forum. Jack Great article. I totally agree. (Living in Austin I have been a fan of Alex Jones for a long time now. His web site is infowars.com). Conspiracy/critical thinking is not about "left wing" or "right wing". It is about what our government has done to we the people. It's time we find a way to take it back. Jack, there are plenty of agendas here, sadly. Dawn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted June 30, 2006 Share Posted June 30, 2006 (edited) [quote name='Jack White' date='Jun 21 2006, 04:36 PM' post='66095']Colby shows he is incapable of understanding, when he said: "Much as I detest Bush, Fetzer's call for a military take over in the US is truly sickening and should be condemned by all members of this forum. " Fetzer was calling for a TAKEOVER BY THE PEOPLE...not by the MILITARY! When someone is 180 degrees from what is stated, they have mental problems or an agenda. Colby should be condemned by all members of this forum. Jack Great article. I totally agree. (Living in Austin I have been a fan of Alex Jones for a long time now. His web site is infowars.com). Conspiracy/critical thinking is not about "left wing" or "right wing". It is about what our government has done to we the people. It's time we find a way to take it back. Jack, there are plenty of agendas here, sadly. Dawn Dawn, I'll ask you the same question I asked Jack, "What part of, "...for years, I've been waiting for there to be a military coup to depose these traitors. There actually was one weekend, where I said to myself, my God, it's going to happen this weekend, and I'm going to wake up and they will have taken these guys off in chains", did you fail to comprehend?" I find your agreement with Jack especially odd in light of the fact that Fetzer himself replied here and didn't claim he meant a revolt by the people. Also as mentioned above a (now ex) member of Fetzer's group ST911 was bothered by the comments enough to ask him about them. He was suspended from the group supposedly for using ST911's logo on a forum without authorization, but he suspects the suspension might have been in related to questioning Fetzer about the remarks. John Austin who is a also a member of ST911 understood Fetzer's comments as indicating he hoped the military would depose Bush [ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jfk-research/message/4758 ] as did members of another forum [ http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php?t=42548&page=3 ] (read from message 84 onward) as did Steve and Dan here. Do you think all of them have an agenda too? Just what do you think our agendas are? I am surprised you take Alex Jones seriously even most conspiracists I know think of him as a bad joke or embarrassment with all his talk about the "Illuminati", "Skull and Bones" and "the occult practices of the global elite" and opposition to gun control. Len PS -Conspiracy thinking and Critical thinking are by no means the same thing. In MOST (not all) cases they are opposites Edited June 30, 2006 by Len Colby Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted July 4, 2006 Author Share Posted July 4, 2006 http://thewebfairy.com/911/krash/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted July 5, 2006 Share Posted July 5, 2006 http://thewebfairy.com/911/krash/ Perhaps Mr. White can explain the provenance of that clip. The site claim it came from a DVD but I don't remember seeing the pre-crash fireball in any other clips Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Lewis Posted July 5, 2006 Share Posted July 5, 2006 Fake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted July 5, 2006 Author Share Posted July 5, 2006 Fake. Opinion or proof? Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Lewis Posted July 5, 2006 Share Posted July 5, 2006 Lower on the same page they show stills from the same angle/same clip without the early explosion. And of course there is the fact that no one reported any really early explosion. But what do you think Jack? Are you really trying to imply that the plane was fake? That the hundreds if not thousands of people who were there live didn't see the second plane? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted July 6, 2006 Share Posted July 6, 2006 Lower on the same page they show stills from the same angle/same clip without the early explosion. And of course there is the fact that no one reported any really early explosion. But what do you think Jack? Are you really trying to imply that the plane was fake? That the hundreds if not thousands of people who were there live didn't see the second plane? Add to that the fact that the 'precrash' fireball didn't appear live at the time. The "webfairy" is one of the least credible members of the "truth" movement. She pushes the theory that the Twin Towers weren't hit by planes but rather holographic projections that were blue screened into film and video (much of it broadcast live) of the 'impacts' or something like that. Her site still has Holocaust denial and "the Jews did it" pages thought they are no longer linked to the main page, but that's another story! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted July 9, 2006 Share Posted July 9, 2006 What does any of this have to do with the very specific topic of this thread? There are more generic 9/11 threads where the above post would have been more appropriate. As for ‘Loose Change’ it is so full of errors it should be redubbed ‘Loose with the Facts’ it has been pretty well debunked at http://www.ccdominoes.com/lc/LooseChangeGuide.html http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/ It is even being questioned with in the “truth community” http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/green/loose_change.html http://911research.wtc7.net/reviews/loose_change/index.html And Mike Ruppert’s timeline? http://mckinneysucks.blogspot.com/ (No I don’t agree with the site’s Rightwing slant) http://www.publiceye.org/conspire/Post911/Solomon1.html http://www.publiceye.org/conspire/conspiracism-911.html http://www.alternet.org/story/12536 Ruppert’s reliability has also been questioned with in the truth movement http://www.wingtv.net/ruppert10.html For a general debunking of 911 myths including those pushed in ‘Loose Change’ and Ruppert http://www.911myths.com/ http://www.geocities.com/debunking911/index.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted July 9, 2006 Share Posted July 9, 2006 Fetzer and the facts never the twain shall meet To read about his “top 10 reasons why there were no hijackers” and reality read this blog entry. http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2006/07/uncle-fetzers-top-ten-reasons-why.html You can watch him here Point #10 was debunked long ago (1) Fetzer, as we come to expect didn’t do his homework. Point #3 Fetzer seems to have pulled out of his hat (I was going to suggest he pulled it out of a part of his anatomy he suggested Tink pulled stuff from but I have more tact (2)). No one, at least not the government, ever claimed the CVR tape of flight 93 picked up the passengers planning to use the beverage cart as a battering ram. Something he could have verified by looking at the official transcript which has been available from various sources since the Moussaoui trial (3), I guess checking to make sure you have your facts straight before shooting your mouth off is something that Fetzer thinks he’s exempt from since he is a “scholar”, PhD and perhaps the World’s most highly accomplished college professor (4). It is tempting to suggest that Fetzer was intentionally lying about point #3 but it’s hard to imagine even “Uncle Fetzer” would be so stupid as to intentionally make a statement that is so easily proven false. Len 1) http://www.911myths.com/html/cnn_passenger_lists.html , http://www.911myths.com/html/passenger_manifests.html 2) The ever charming ‘scholar’ wrote “Thompson just pulls this stuff out his ass” http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FETZERclaims...NK/message/2560 3) http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/moussaouitranscript.pdf 4) Fetzer actually made this claim. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jfk-research/message/3858 funny thing for a prof. at a forth rate school to make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted July 10, 2006 Share Posted July 10, 2006 (edited) Do you now or have you ever worked for an intelligence agency or their hired PR firms? That Loose Change has some minor errors, no doubt...they were in their early 20s and not investigators. However, they investigated MORE and BETTER than the official Commission or Ommissioners did! You try to present yourself as the cool, calm, dispassionate skeptic on things conspiratorial. I think you might have a hidden agenda. The guys who made Loose Change are the patriots even if they didn't get all perfectly correct. Those in the 911 Ommission and Warren Ommission and even more so those monsters who brought us all that C O N S P I R A C Y are NOT. Which side are you on? Someone has stolen my country and our common future bit by bit and I for one don't like it when people add to the coverup and try to negate the horrors we have been subjected to. If your not part of the solution, you are part of the problem. I will let the 'veiwing public' out there in cyberland evaluate my suggested reading and yours. I am not afraid of the truth...those that coverup are. I would love to be wrong and to know that a lone nut killed JFK and RFK and MLK - but it ain't so.....and few are 'buying it'. Ditto 911. Ditto Watergate. Ditto so much else. Are you remotely controlled? I am not now, nor have I ever been an employee of the US or any other government, intelligence agency or PR firm they hired, Mr. McCarthy eeeer Lemkin. The JFK, RFK and MLK assassinations are not germane to this thread nor is Watergate or the erosion of democracy in the US, nor even is "Loose Change" unless they provided evidence that 757s or 767s could be remote controlled. If you have evidence of such capability present it here. If not and you wish to discuss other issues I suggest you do so in more appropriate threads. If you want to debate the veracity of the claims made by the makers of "Loose Change" or other LIHOP or MIHOP theorists feel free (in appropriate threads). I am not afraid of the truth, in the case of 9/11 however the claims made by the CTists have little if any merit. Since you brought them up I'll state that I believe the probabilities that JFK and MLK were killed as the result of conspiracies is quite high (though I think the evidence the Z – film was altered is close to zero). I also agree with you that the current administration has as part of its agenda the weakening of democracy in the US. It is my belief that nonsense accusations against them only play into their (Bush's and Rove's) hands because they 1) distract from their real as opposed to imagined crimes and abuses and 2) make moderates LESS likely to take such issues as rigging of the elections, war profiteering, manipulation of pre-war intelligence on Iraq etc seriously. So I ask you, 'are you now or have you ever worked for an intelligence agency, the RNC, Carl Rove, the Bush family or any of their hired PR firms?' Len PS – Did you even look at the links I provided? Edited July 10, 2006 by Len Colby Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted July 10, 2006 Author Share Posted July 10, 2006 (edited) You are all over this Forum spreading doubt on analysis into the machinery behind the curtain of the Wizards of OZ. I think this is your job, not your 'belief' IMHO. If we were all so deluded you would ignore us IMHO as you do flat-earth or extraterrestrial websites. You are here because, IMHO, you fear or your masters fear the truth being sought here. I really don't care to find the very good file I have on my computer about remote control of aircraft and Lufthansa having taken out the controls installed upon receipt of the planes. I'm going to take my own advice and ignore you and ask others to also. I'm mad as hell. Someone stole my country and stole all I owned [after the late night phone threats and various dirty tricks in court and my life] - I think you may know who they are and you certainly support them by asking/suggesting everyone look the 'other way'. Over and Out Len - or whoever you really are. My final word is 'Shame on you' for either buying into or being bought out on/by the BIG LIE IMHO. I think the global view of the conspiracies we have been faced with are germaine here - as you have a global refusal to see any of them, it seems. If I'm wrong, sorry, and if that child in your photo is really yours I hope she won't return to the USA to find it as it is now and has been headed since WW2 because of the conspiracies at the end of it through the Cold War...and Dallas...and Watergate...and Iran Contra...and and and and....ad nauseum....and 911. May she also when old enough find out about the US guided coup d'etat in Brazil, if that is where you really are - as well as the multifold ones we have had here and generated around the world in our name and NOT in the name of freedom or peace or justice or anything good or noble...NOT one since WW2 - not one. If you are only naive, I hope you see the light. Now to fight the real enemy...your ['nonexistant'] conspirators - my/our real nemesis. IMHO Bravo, Peter! An excellent expose of one of the forum provocaterurs. Now do the same for all the others here. Some are assigned to JFK, some to Apollo, some to 911, some to the Zapruder Hoax. They spend full time defending official govt stories and secrets. Some of them seem assigned to follow Jack White around the internet and make vicious attacks on me. Check the forum threads and you will see they seldom post except in reply to Jack White research. It makes them stand out like sore thumbs. Better procedure would be to appear to be actual researchers to establish what the agency calls "bonafides". Instead, their every posting is to oppose and insult me. Some apparently use "agency" names instead of real names. Some have posted under two different names. I believe that (like LHO), some names are shared by different persons. Why would ANYONE spend FULL TIME defending wrongdoing? Their activities make no sense to anyone seeking the truth. As you say, why not just ignore researchers as they would "flat-earthers" if they are ordinary people? Only idiots or paid provocateurs would support the Warren Report. It makes no sense for ordinary people to do it so zealously. It is possible that all operate out of the same Langley office. It is nothing new to me. The first one was before the internet. His name was Roy Pope (no, not that Roy Pope) and he admitted to being a "former" CIA agent. He made long-distance phone calls to me from all over the world in the 70s, talking for hours about the MC rifle. He had a great voice over the phone, like a radio announcer. Several years later, Mary Ferrell brought him to one of my slide lectures, and he turned out to be short, chubby and bald...I was disappointed that he did not look like James Bond...and he fell asleep during the slide show. He claimed to be a private detective, and claimed an association with Gerry Patrick Hemming. The "other" Roy Pope was a former agent also. He founded the National Enquirer". Jack Edited July 10, 2006 by Jack White Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted July 10, 2006 Share Posted July 10, 2006 You are all over this Forum spreading doubt on analysis into the machinery behind the curtain of the Wizards of OZ. I think this is your job, not your 'belief' IMHO. If we were all so deluded you would ignore us IMHO as you do flat-earth or extraterrestrial websites. You are here because, IMHO, you fear or your masters fear the truth being sought here. I really don't care to find the very good file I have on my computer about remote control of aircraft and Lufthansa having taken out the controls installed upon receipt of the planes. I'm going to take my own advice and ignore you and ask others to also. I'm mad as hell. Someone stole my country and stole all I owned [after the late night phone threats and various dirty tricks in court and my life] - I think you may know who they are and you certainly support them by asking/suggesting everyone look the 'other way'. Over and Out Len - or whoever you really are. My final word is 'Shame on you' for either buying into or being bought out on/by the BIG LIE IMHO. I think the global view of the conspiracies we have been faced with are germaine here - as you have a global refusal to see any of them, it seems. If I'm wrong, sorry, and if that child in your photo is really yours I hope she won't return to the USA to find it as it is now and has been headed since WW2 because of the conspiracies at the end of it through the Cold War...and Dallas...and Watergate...and Iran Contra...and and and and....ad nauseum....and 911. May she also when old enough find out about the US guided coup d'etat in Brazil, if that is where you really are - as well as the multifold ones we have had here and generated around the world in our name and NOT in the name of freedom or peace or justice or anything good or noble...NOT one since WW2 - not one. If you are only naive, I hope you see the light. Now to fight the real enemy...your ['nonexistant'] conspirators - my/our real nemesis. IMHO Bravo, Peter! An excellent expose of one of the forum provocaterurs. Now do the same for all the others here. Some are assigned to JFK, some to Apollo, some to 911, some to the Zapruder Hoax. They spend full time defending official govt stories and secrets. Some of them seem assigned to follow Jack White around the internet and make vicious attacks on me. Check the forum threads and you will see they seldom post except in reply to Jack White research. It makes them stand out like sore thumbs. Better procedure would be to appear to be actual researchers to establish what the agency calls "bonafides". Instead, their every posting is to oppose and insult me. Some apparently use "agency" names instead of real names. Some have posted under two different names. I believe that (like LHO), some names are shared by different persons. Why would ANYONE spend FULL TIME defending wrongdoing? Their activities make no sense to anyone seeking the truth. As you say, why not just ignore researchers as they would "flat-earthers" if they are ordinary people? Only idiots or paid provocateurs would support the Warren Report. It makes no sense for ordinary people to do it so zealously. It is possible that all operate out of the same Langley office. It is nothing new to me. The first one was before the internet. His name was Roy Pope (no, not that Roy Pope) and he admitted to being a "former" CIA agent. He made long-distance phone calls to me from all over the world in the 70s, talking for hours about the MC rifle. He had a great voice over the phone, like a radio announcer. Several years later, Mary Ferrell brought him to one of my slide lectures, and he turned out to be short, chubby and bald...I was disappointed that he did not look like James Bond...and he fell asleep during the slide show. He claimed to be a private detective, and claimed an association with Gerry Patrick Hemming. The "other" Roy Pope was a former agent also. He founded the National Enquirer". Jack ROFLMAO! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted July 11, 2006 Author Share Posted July 11, 2006 Colby and Lamson are such aeronautical experts, I want their expert opinion on this: According to the official story and map, Flight 77 descended from several thousand feet quickly at top speed in a tight circle with a RADIUS OF LESS THAN TWO MILES, and then leveled out AT TOP SPEED for a 757 to treetop level before striking the Pentagon with precision at the first floor without striking the lawn. Based on their 757 jetliner expertise, I wish to know whether Colby and Lamson agree with the official scenario as presented in the map. Please cite Boeing performance statistics regarding rate of descent at various speeds, and the turning radius possible at top speed before the aircraft experiences structural failure. I look forward to receiving all this information. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted July 11, 2006 Share Posted July 11, 2006 (edited) Colby and Lamson are such aeronautical experts, I want theirexpert opinion on this: According to the official story and map, Flight 77 descended from several thousand feet quickly at top speed in a tight circle with a RADIUS OF LESS THAN TWO MILES, and then leveled out AT TOP SPEED for a 757 to treetop level before striking the Pentagon with precision at the first floor without striking the lawn. Based on their 757 jetliner expertise, I wish to know whether Colby and Lamson agree with the official scenario as presented in the map. Please cite Boeing performance statistics regarding rate of descent at various speeds, and the turning radius possible at top speed before the aircraft experiences structural failure. I look forward to receiving all this information. Jack I have never claimed to be an aeronautical expert. Those are your words. Of course I agree with the official story, and the points both Len and I have made in this regard are on this forum along with the relevant links. You want to find them I suggest you use the search function, if you know how. If you missed it the first time around maybe you wil have better luck this time. Len may be willing to repeat himself for the sorry likes of you, I will not. Edited July 11, 2006 by Craig Lamson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now