Hellbound
Merchant of Doom
Ed Moving On is coming.
- Thread starter mrfreeze
- Start date
Yes or no Gravy?
Are you an admin or mod?
Insult? I didn't call him a chicken. I asked if he was one or not.
Neither.
Gravy,
I refer you to this post: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2012593&postcount=214
and this one: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2010653&postcount=103
The very poor and disrespectful handling of this by the government is a disgrace to say the least.
Some people here have suggested if there was a cover up it was to hide incompetence.
Don't you feel that alone is worth a second investigation?
Don't you feel it strange not one person has been held accountable for this alleged "incompetence"?
Russell
I refer you to this post: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2012593&postcount=214
and this one: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2010653&postcount=103
The very poor and disrespectful handling of this by the government is a disgrace to say the least.
Some people here have suggested if there was a cover up it was to hide incompetence.
Don't you feel that alone is worth a second investigation?
Don't you feel it strange not one person has been held accountable for this alleged "incompetence"?
Russell
Last edited:
I'm always curious - what would class as a 'truly independent investigation'. Have you got some specific criteria re. how a panel would be selected, examples of appropriate commissioners, methodology/ies to use etc? And would you then accept the conclusions of this investigation?
Well until an admin/mod on here forces me to gag one of my links, it stays.
Btw, do you support gag orders?
Our definition of clear evidence is different. The linguistic machinations over the definition of evidence is an endless discussion clear back to when Descartes was trying to prove he even existed.
You will see upon a careful reading that I made no accusation whatsoever. I stated it as a belief and I also used the term blindly. Blindly implies without intent. I do not presume anybody here is even consciously supporting a cover up based on incompetence. In my world a cover up is a cover up. Period. Then if you cover up incompetence that resulted in the deaths of nearly 3000 of your own citizens it is still a crime in my opinion. Our administration is therefore not truthful. If our administration is not truthful then I have no reason to believe their 19 hijacker conspiracy.
Russell
Last edited:
Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2006
- Messages
- 17,078
Here I am talking to a 9/11 eyewitness and victim, some of whose views I strongly disagree with.
I introduced myself, using my real name, Mark Roberts.
I allow my photograph to be shown.
We had a useful exchange of information.
I have a tremendous amount of respect for what he went through.
I do not feel the need to disparage him.
I did not start a blog and a website for the purpose of suggesting that he's a fraud.
Who's the chicken, "Killtown," me or you?
Which one of us anonymously harasses victims of 9/11?
You do.
Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2006
- Messages
- 17,078
Let us know when you have some evidence to support your claims and your call for a new investigation, Russell. Your suggestions are not refutations of the mountains of evidence that's already been gathered.
Come on - all those cool black 'investigate 911' t-shirts, and I still haven't seen a clear description as to what type of investigation campaigners want. You've called for an investigation several times, but I'm not clear what you mean either.
To put together an investigation that all 'sides' would accept as 'independent' would be very hard - I can't think how this would be done - so maybe you could help me out?
Edited to add: while I was typing this, Killtown called for an investigation, again.
Arkan_Wolfshade
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2006
- Messages
- 7,154
Which 9/11 victims have I harrassed?
Gravy,
I find your transparency and forthrightness 100% commendable.
I also have a question in regards to your comment about his testimony. You can say I don't have solid direct evidence and that is fine. But the statement that you disagree with an individual who was right there and experienced it directly makes me wonder. He was there and we weren't. What would compel you to question his testimony except an adamant belief that the story is not true?
In other words, what is your evidential basis for not believing a direct eyewitness who is also willing to put his name and face on his statements?
Russell
I find your transparency and forthrightness 100% commendable.
I also have a question in regards to your comment about his testimony. You can say I don't have solid direct evidence and that is fine. But the statement that you disagree with an individual who was right there and experienced it directly makes me wonder. He was there and we weren't. What would compel you to question his testimony except an adamant belief that the story is not true?
In other words, what is your evidential basis for not believing a direct eyewitness who is also willing to put his name and face on his statements?
Russell
Other campaigns for investigations - for example, into the deaths at Deepcut in the UK - are pretty specific about what type of investigations and disclosures they want. So far as I can tell, the 'truth' movement isn't (well, I did hear David Ray Griffin demand that the investigators should be able to use lie detectors
). The specifics are important here, and I'm not sure what they are. If the government agreed to give you the investigation you're calling for tomorrow, how would you go about it?