• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Kevin Ryan writes book, will blame 19 by name

RepresentativePress said:
I don't think your memory is accurate, at the time, the dominating media was feeding the public lies and deception. You may be confusing things that happened years later. Note that the reporter challenges Bush years too late: The Continuing BS from AP and the MSM about Iraq and 9/11
(in that video, the reporter asks a question years too late. Also note that other examples of the media's performance show the media still playing the game of deceiving the public.)

This is one of the most frustrating things with the truthers, their stupidity is undermining efforts to hold powerful people accountable for real wrongs.
Click to expand...

Hmmm, Fox News, of all places...
Israel: Iraq Aids Palestinian Terror, But No Links to Al Qaeda (Published February 01, 2003)

A senior Israeli security source told The Associated Press this week that Israel has not yet found evidence of an Iraqi-Palestinian-Al Qaeda triangle, and that several investigations into possible Al Qaeda ties to Palestinian militias have so far not yielded substantial results.
Click to expand...
 
LSSBB said:
Hmmm, Fox News, of all places...
Israel: Iraq Aids Palestinian Terror, But No Links to Al Qaeda (Published February 01, 2003)
Click to expand...


I said "the dominating media was feeding the public lies and deception." I didn't say that no articles with a few details contrary to the dominating message ever appeared on a webpage that few saw. And compensating families who had their houses destroyed by Israel hardly qualifies as "aiding Palestinian terror" so that article manages to misrepresent that as well.

"But the real job of the media is not to sprinkle 1 percent truth amidst 99 percent ********, so that diligent researchers can search it out like Easter eggs. The job of the media is to present information so that when when its audience consumes it in the usual manner, that audience can get some sense of what reality is like. By this basic standard, the corporate media failed."
http://www.fair.org/blog/2013/03/25...iraq-iraq-just-showed-we-have-a-failed-media/
 
Last edited:
RepresentativePress said:
I said "the dominating media was feeding the public lies and deception." I didn't say that no articles with a few details contrary to the dominating message ever appeared on a webpage that few saw. And compensating families who had their housed destroyed by Israel hardly qualifies as "aiding Palestinian terror" so that article manages to misrepresent that as well.

"But the real job of the media is not to sprinkle 1 percent truth amidst 99 percent ********, so that diligent researchers can search it out like Easter eggs. The job of the media is to present information so that when when its audience consumes it in the usual manner, that audience can get some sense of what reality is like. By this basic standard, the corporate media failed."
http://www.fair.org/blog/2013/03/25...iraq-iraq-just-showed-we-have-a-failed-media/
Click to expand...

And I said 'many', not all or even most. The doubts were out there. Most Americans apparently chose not to notice them.
 
LSSBB said:
And I said 'many', not all or even most. The doubts were out there. Most Americans apparently chose not to notice them.
Click to expand...

"many" is simply not accurate. You are trying too hard to make excuses for what was mass media fraud. Sure if some wanted to conduct a research project and look through many media outlets, they could find a number of articles which questioned some things but the overall dominating narrative was deceit. I think it is unfair to blame the public like you are doing when the powers that be dominate the public discourse and spread such lies and deception. It is very easy to see how so many people were manipulated and that's because powerful news organizations were manipulating them. Why do you feel the need to deflect blame away from the deceivers and onto those deceived? It is unfair to misrepresent that as a "choice." Even now, mass media perpetrates massive deception and works to shield the powerful from public scrutiny.
 
RepresentativePress said:
"many" is simply not accurate. You are trying too hard to make excuses for what was mass media fraud. Sure if some wanted to conduct a research project and look through many media outlets, they could find a number of articles which questioned some things but the overall dominating narrative was deceit. I think it is unfair to blame the public like you are doing when the powers that be dominate the public discourse and spread such lies and deception. It is very easy to see how so many people were manipulated and that's because powerful news organizations were manipulating them. Why do you feel the need to deflect blame away from the deceivers and onto those deceived? It is unfair to misrepresent that as a "choice." Even now, mass media perpetrates massive deception and works to shield the powerful from public scrutiny.
Click to expand...

I'm not making any excuses. Did I make an excuse? Were news organizations in general not nosy enough? Sure! Hey, they're pretty much in it to make money anyway, not win pulitzers., in my view. I just don't see why we need to go all... Watanabe ... on this, for lack of a better term.
 
RepresentativePress said:
You think you are clever by trying to blow smoke to obscure the fact that politicians and pundits have been deceiving the public about why we are being targeted? If it could not be any more clear that they are trying to hide the fact that it is about foreign policies, here is a politician explicitly lying about it: http://youtu.be/dd2dwf0OP2A
Click to expand...

wow, a lie? Wow, where is your Pulitzer? What does that have to do with Kevin Ryan? Any thing on topic yet? What forum do you think you are in? Close the loop. 911 CTs? Oh, you need to start you own CT thread.


Gee whiz super SPAM... I read UBL's reasons, and one was due to me. Sorry, you must have a problem with Israel, and you left out all the other reasons. But feel free to be stuck on your one trick pony reason as Kevin Ryan writes woo. Does all this mean you don't like Israel?

Why are you stuck on one reason? What are the rest? How does this relate to Kevin Ryan?
 
my posts are in response to the posts by BasqueArch and Pacal. I don't see anything wrong in responding to what they posted. And I didn't leave out the other motives, if you read my posts, it is all there and linked to the info. The main motive, anger at U.S. support of Israel, needs to be discussed. I have a right to discuss the main motive. ANd if the actions of U.S. foreign policy were so noble, why do the powers that be feel the need to suppress them? The fact they were so deceitful about the motives doesn't give you pause to question just how wonderful these policies really are? Did you ever consider looking into what Israel actually is and actually does?
 
RepresentativePress said:
my posts are in response to the posts by BasqueArch and Pacal. I don't see anything wrong in responding to what they posted. And I didn't leave out the other motives, if you read my posts, it is all there and linked to the info. The main motive, anger at U.S. support of Israel, needs to be discussed. I have a right to discuss the main motive. ANd if the actions of U.S. foreign policy were so noble, why do the powers that be feel the need to suppress them? The fact they were so deceitful about the motives doesn't give you pause to question just how wonderful these policies really are? Did you ever consider looking into what Israel actually is and actually does?
Click to expand...

You don't like Israel, but the fact is the reason is in the 911 report, you ignore all the other reasons UBL used to recruit nuts, and bored Saudis.
UBL had other reasons, you are stuck on the Israel one, and don't seem to like the rest of the reasons. Why is your reason in the 911 Report?

UBL - "protested U.S. support of Israel." source, oops, 911 Report.

What was your complaint, and how does Kevin Ryan fit into this?
 
Last edited:
beachnut said:
but the fact is the reason is in the 911 report ....
UBL - "protested U.S. support of Israel." source, oops, 911 Report.
Click to expand...

It is extremely downplayed and misrepresented, I don't know who you think you are fooling but the two top 9/11 Commissioners admit that concern that the public might reassess the policy of supporting Israel influenced what they put in the 9/11 Report and what they left out. "the panel watered down that frank conclusion to state that U.S. policy on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and U.S. policy on Iraq are "dominant staples of popular commentary across the Arab and Muslim world."" "In their view, listing U.S. support for Israel as a root cause of al Qaeda's opposition to the United States indicated that the United States should reassess that policy."

saying U.S. support of Israel and U.S. policy on Iraq are "dominant staples of popular commentary across the Arab and Muslim world" is weasel words. the Commissioners betrayed the American people, I don't think you read my previous posts carefully. Notice that key testimony was omitted about ISrael and if you look at the staff statements and compare it to what ended up in the 9/11 Report, you can see how "sensitive" the Commissioners were to the detriment of the people's right to a full accounting.

"the al Qaeda leader wanted to punish the United States for supporting Israel. " - Philip Zelikow 9/11 Commission Executive Director
THAT statement didn't make it in. Here are other examples: http://youtu.be/UHFhACaej4Q?t=2m5s

"(Reuters) Sep 11, 11:19 AM ET Saudi dissident Osama bin Laden warned three weeks ago that he and his followers would carry out an unprecedented attack on U.S. interests for its support of Israel, an Arab journalist with access to him said Tuesday."
Almost no news reporter was willing to read "Israel" on that morning, so who do you think you are kidding. I have video of Dan Rather stopping himself before he says it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=95ncn5Q16N4&feature=youtu.be&t=2m55s
 
RepresentativePress said:
It is extremely downplayed and misrepresented, I don't know who you think you are fooling but the two top 9/11 Commissioners admit that concern that the public might reassess the policy of supporting Israel influenced what they put in the 9/11 Report and what they left out. "the panel watered down that frank conclusion to state that U.S. policy on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and U.S. policy on Iraq are "dominant staples of popular commentary across the Arab and Muslim world."" "In their view, listing U.S. support for Israel as a root cause of al Qaeda's opposition to the United States indicated that the United States should reassess that policy."

saying U.S. support of Israel and U.S. policy on Iraq are "dominant staples of popular commentary across the Arab and Muslim world" is weasel words. the Commissioners betrayed the American people, I don't think you read my previous posts carefully. Notice that key testimony was omitted about ISrael and if you look at the staff statements and compare it to what ended up in the 9/11 Report, you can see how "sensitive" the Commissioners were to the detriment of the people's right to a full accounting.

"the al Qaeda leader wanted to punish the United States for supporting Israel. " - Philip Zelikow 9/11 Commission Executive Director
THAT statement didn't make it in. Here are other examples: http://youtu.be/UHFhACaej4Q?t=2m5s

"(Reuters) Sep 11, 11:19 AM ET Saudi dissident Osama bin Laden warned three weeks ago that he and his followers would carry out an unprecedented attack on U.S. interests for its support of Israel, an Arab journalist with access to him said Tuesday."
Almost no news reporter was willing to read "Israel" on that morning, so who do you think you are kidding. I have video of Dan Rather stopping himself before he says it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=95ncn5Q16N4&feature=youtu.be&t=2m55s
Click to expand...
Yes, only 35 times does "israel" show up in the 911 report - does it need more? Only Hitler's book against the Jews mentions the work Jew more, than the 911 report mention Israel. Bet Hitler would love Israel as much as you do.

The political forum is over there -----> or over there <------- not here.


UBL - "protested U.S. support of Israel." From the 911 report.

Which part was downplayed? UBL - "protested U.S. support of Israel."

Even UBL said it. It is real, truth, what UBL thought; one of the reasons he decided to murder Americans, because we have the freedom to pick who we support. Poor UBL, dead. UBL is upset we are not of Islam too. Another reason.

What would Kevin Ryan do? Do you have youtube for all your nonsense? Youtube; I can hear the horses... "youtube"
 
Last edited:
Folks, please get back to the topic of the thread, remain civil, and cut out the personalizations. I do not wish to dump a whole bunch of posts to Abandon All Hope but if you don't get back to the topic and remain mindful of your Membership Agreement, I will have to do so. Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: LashL
 
Orphia Nay said:
I went there to see if the 19 "suspects" were named, but they weren't.

Typical snake-oil advertising. "If you want to know the truth, you have to buy my book."

Oh, well, I voted up the 1-star reviews while I was there.
Click to expand...


There's a "look inside" option if you click on the cover. He names them in the TOC.
 
Thanks, Muc.

I'm still sure it's snake oil, but not for the reason I said.

Here are the people's names in the table of contents:

1 Dick
2 Don
3 Carlucci
4 Armitage
5 Louis Freeh
6 George Tenet
7 Richard Clarke
8 Canavan
9 Sliney
10 Ralph Eberhart
11 Carl Truscott
12 John
13 Paul
14 Peter
15 Bremer
16 Jenkins
17 Wirt Walker
18 Barry McDaniel
19 Rudy Giuliani
20 Duane Andrews
21 Porter Goss
 
Orphia Nay said:
Thanks, Muc.

I'm still sure it's snake oil, but not for the reason I said.

Here are the people's names in the table of contents:

1 Dick
2 Don
3 Carlucci
4 Armitage
5 Louis Freeh
6 George Tenet
7 Richard Clarke
8 Canavan
9 Sliney
10 Ralph Eberhart
11 Carl Truscott
12 John
13 Paul
14 Peter
15 Bremer
16 Jenkins
17 Wirt Walker
18 Barry McDaniel
19 Rudy Giuliani
20 Duane Andrews
21 Porter Goss
Click to expand...
He's only off by a littler over 10%. :p
 
Orphia Nay said:
Thanks, Muc.

I'm still sure it's snake oil, but not for the reason I said.

Here are the people's names in the table of contents:

1 Dick
2 Don
3 Carlucci
4 Armitage
5 Louis Freeh
6 George Tenet
7 Richard Clarke
8 Canavan
9 Sliney
10 Ralph Eberhart
11 Carl Truscott
12 John
13 Paul
14 Peter
15 Bremer
16 Jenkins
17 Wirt Walker18 Barry McDaniel
19 Rudy Giuliani
20 Duane Andrews
21 Porter Goss
Click to expand...

Wirt Walker? Where's Marvin Bush?:rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom