Sunday, November 12, 2006

No More Political Blogging For the Wrong Dog...

Again, I will start using this site as my lifechest and less as a platform for political issues. However, I am now working with a great group of peoples over at Montana Netroots. It's a joint effort by Montana bloggers to build a collaborative community. Bookmark it and add it to your blogrolll please!

I'll be back here posting on social issues and other things dear to my heart.

As soon as Matt Singer gets Left In The West back up, you will be able to find me there too.


Enlightenment said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Shane C. Mason said...

Sorry Enlightenment. If you want to make comments that long and detailed and offtopic, perhaps you could get your own blog? They are free. Thanks for the info though!

Enlightenment said...

Jeff over at tried to make a point about the flight manifests, asking for me to respond, then turns off the comments so I CAN'T respond and so he can then fold his arms smugly and say "See? He isn't responding" which I anticipate he will soon do, or perhaps just leave it the way it is letting him get the last word, dishonestly making it appear that I am not trying to respond when the douche knows he turned off the comments. Sounds like somebody's not too confident in the "official" story after all Jeff. Since he mentioned this site and it is impossible to respond to him since he is being profoundly intellectually cowardly, I will respond here.

One problem with the manifests is that different networks released different manifests, not matching up entirely. In fact there were a few too many "innocent victim" passengers, some apparantly fake. So what does that tell you about the reliability of the flight manifests in the first place?

Another problem is that the government supposedly did autopsies on the people on board Flight 77 (the one the "official" story claims crashed into Pentagon), not letting independent medical examiners have access (I wonder why?) and there were no Arabs among them. Now a preponderance of evidence proves that Flight 77 was not what crashed into the Pentagon anyway, but regardless, Jeff's own beloved government that did alleged autopsies on the people supposedly on board the plane can find no Arabs among them. How do you explain that Jeff? Did the "Arab hijackers" magically turn into non-Arabs or what? Doesn't any of this smell fishy to you?

Still another problem is that the government supposedly found DNA of three people that were not ever claimed to have been on Flight 77.

Yet another flaw in the "Arab hijackers" fantasy is that some of the accused "hijackers" turned up days later alive and well, wondering why they were being accused of something they obviously did not do.

Nevertheless, the F.B.I. claims that it correctly identified the "hijackers" and that they were who they (the F.B.I.) says they were, even though this is now a physical impossibility.

But hey, this is the same F.B.I. that admits that it has no hard evidence whatsoever linking Osama bin Laden to 9/11 in the first place, so what do you expect?

In sum, Jeff, if quibbling about the very controversial and apparantly altered or at least very slipshod flight manifests is the best you can come up with then you are grasping at straws. It is astounding that someone could read or at least presumably read the looooooooong post I wrote that shows many, many holes in the "official" myth and ignore all of it except one tiny part that you seem to think suits you. Jeff, there are many holes in the myth that I didn't even mention, such as Bush's Secret Service allowing him to remain at Booker Elementary for at least 35 minutes after being told by Andy Card that there had been a second crash at the Twin Towers, meaning it was apparant to anyone concerned that it could be no accident; at that time Bush should have been IMMEDIATELY picked up by the armpits and physically carried out of there to a much safer, less-publicized location because if the "official" story were true then his Secret Service would have had to assume Bush was at least a possible target. But instead of following standard procedure like they would any other time, on that morning they didn't. Bush was allowed to remain there for at least 35 more minutes, and even carried out a press conference at the school! What can this tell you Jeff except that Bush and his Secret Service chief had to have known that the high-value target that is an American president was not even a possible target that morning? And what can them knowing that tell you but that they had to have known the 9/11 plans beforehand if they could be so confident? What do you make of that? Or the record amounts of "put" orders (betting a stock will decline in value) placed on stocks of United Airlines, American Airlines and Morgan Stanley-Dean Witter in the week before 9/11? The half-assed "debunking" site you linked to amazingly regards this as a normal occurance, vividly illustrating its lack of credibility. (Just like it claims an airy figure of between 10 and 15 seconds for the "collapses" of the Twin Towers, claiming that various websites state various "collapse" times, when all the stooge had to do was to look in the so-called "9/11 Commission Report" and see that even THAT obvious whitewash handbook admits that the Twin Towers' "collapse" times were 10 seconds apiece, which accounting for air resistance is freefall rate for that height, hence all the 9/11 websites that claim freefall rate or freefall rate accounting for air resistance "collapses". Why? Because not only is it seen in video footage but the "official" story even is forced to admit to the 10 second "collapse" times. So if you think that ridiculous "debunking" website is anything other than a placebo salve to make people like you feel good about being in denial of the truth, think again. And try acting like an adult and actually allowing someone to respond when you ask them to respond. Immature douchebag.

Enlightenment said...

I understand that you took the post down but would you please post my response at since there is no way for me to respond to him since he is being a twat that wants to ask someone to respond and then turn off comments? I would very much appreciate it. Again, my apologies for the long post about the truth about 9/11, but you are certainly very welcome for the information.