So WHO is dishonoring the victims here?

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

So WHO is dishonoring the victims here?

Postby darkbeforedawn » Sat Apr 15, 2006 11:16 pm

<!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://kurtnimmo.com/?p=334">kurtnimmo.com/?p=334</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br>Friday April 14th 2006, 5:56 pm <br><br>Doug Thompson, editor and publisher of Capitol Hill Blue, has slipped into warp drive. He believes you and I—those who believe the government was complicit or behind the attacks of nine eleven—are “fruitcakes, lemmings and scam artists.” I’m not sure why Thompson has become so enraged at those of us who don’t buy the official version (a fairy tale) and why he assumes we are either crazed tinfoil hatters or snake oil salesmen looking for a quick buck (and believe me, if you’re interested in making a quick buck, you’d have more luck going door-to-door as a hawker of Amway products). His venom leads me to believe something is going on behind the scenes. I find it remarkably strange that Thompson believes his government is capable of setting up a police state, while on the other is unable to grasp the idea that very same government would kill its own citizens, as it has slaughtered thousands and thousands of Iraqis (and millions of Asians before the latest round of serial murder). <br><br>Let’s take a look at Thompson’s latest “rant” (as he dubs his column):<br><br>“Those who buy into such nutcase causes dishonor the memory of every man, woman and child who died on that horrible day. Even worse, they become willing pawns for the quick-buck scammers who use such events to line their own pockets.”<br><br>No, Doug, you dishonor them with your inability to think beyond the official, government sanctioned version—a mostly flat wave version that would have never emerged if the families of the victims—in particular, the “Jersey Girls,” Kristin Breitweiser, Patty Casazza, Lorie Van Auken, and Mindy Kleinberg—had not leaned on the Bushites. Is Lorie Van Auken a fruitcake? “At first, we widows didn’t want to be seen with conspiracy people. But they kept showing up. They cared more than those supposedly doing the investigating. If you ask me, they’re just Americans, looking for the truth, which is supposed to be our right,” Van Auken told New York Magazine. But then maybe Ms. Van Auken is a scam artist like the rest of us determined to get at the truth—dedicated lemmings going over the edge. Dare I say, Doug, you dishonor “the memory of every man, woman and child who died on that horrible day” with your inability to consider the common sense fact nineteen Arab hijackers were unable to violate the laws of physics on nine eleven? <br><br>“You all too often find these wackos on web sites that also promote anti-Semitism and hate—the ones that claim the Holocaust didn’t happen and blame everything bad that happens on some vast ‘Zionist’ conspiracy.” <br><br>Okay, let’s face it—Doug Thompson is a neocon, or at least he comes off sounding like one, regardless of his previous and admirable rants against the squashing of the Constitution and the emergent police state. Doug, check out the Scholars for 9/11 Truth, all respected professionals, and not an anti-Semite among them. Not all skeptics believe nine eleven was a “Zionist” conspiracy and it is remarkably unfair, even illogical and desperate, for you to claim such a thing. It’s a bankrupt accusation and really doesn’t stick anymore. You may want to consult your new friends, the neocons, for more effective talking points. <br><br>“Check out the web sites that promote the various, and ridiculous conspiracy theories surrounding 9/11 and you will find that just about all of them ask for money. The same is true for the so-called ‘news’ sites that support these outlandish conspiracy fantasies.”<br><br>I notice Capitol Hill Blue is teeming with banner ads for corporate interests such as Verizon, the Dish Network, Best Western, TiVo, and others. I bet you put those up for free. Let’s face it, Doug. It costs money to run a website. Some of us write about other things besides nine eleven and as journalists we’d like to get paid for it. I have a donation button on my blog. I’d like to write political commentary and get paid for it like the hacks over at the Washington Post and the New York Times. I don’t consider myself a scam artist for putting up a donation button. I wonder how much of that lucrative banner income works its way to your bank account, Mr. Thompson. <br><br>“All link to the same, discredited “sources” for their claims. All claim to have “evidence” that is nothing but flights of fancy. All, in my opinion, are scams. I’ve spent weeks searching through these web sites and read all the links to so-called “evidence” and I have yet to find one, single, shred of verifiable information that provides any proof that our government planned or executed the attacks.”<br><br>And Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK all on his lonesome. You’re really showing your ignorance here, Doug. Of course there is no direct evidence the government was complicit in nine eleven. It doesn’t work that way. Speaking of JFK, maybe you saw Oliver Stone’s film on the assassination. If you did, you may remember David Ferrie, played by Joe Pesci, telling Jim Garrison: “Who did the president, who killed Kennedy, f— man! It’s a mystery! It’s a mystery wrapped in a riddle inside an enigma! The f—in’ shooters don’t even know! Don’t you get it?” Doug, you don’t get it. Governments cover up their tracks and shift blame on patsies. I’d suggest you do a bit of history reading. Begin with Nicco Machiavelli. After you read Nicco, search for Operation Northwoods via Google. <br><br>“Our government failed on many levels to respond to information that might have prevented the attacks but incompetence does not prove a conspiracy. America has a long, tainted history of getting caught with its pants down.”<br><br>A couple weeks ago, after I wrote about Thompson’s first column dissing nine eleven truth seekers, I received an email assuring me that Thompson is a Republican. Indeed, he thinks and writes like a Republican—and a Democrat, since there ain’t a lick of difference betwixt the two. It wasn’t incompetence that made NORAD stand down or the towers collapse like a textbook demolition. Incompetence didn’t “pull” Building Seven. Incompetence didn’t make airline wreckage (including titanium) at the Pentagon vaporize in thin air while bodies were supposedly left intact enough to get DNA from. It didn’t make Flight 93 disappear in a ten foot hole in Pennsylvania. <br><br>“A jury in Alexandria, Virginia, this week heard the cockpit voice tapes of United Flight 93, a hijacked airliner bound for the U.S. Capitol in Washington. The actions of passengers who knew they were going to die prevented the plane from reaching its destination. The passengers of Flight 93 are some of the true heroes of September 11.”<br><br>Doug, is it inconceivable these tapes are forgeries, same as the cell phone calls made at 25,000 feet inside an airliner going 500 miles per hour? At the time, it was technically impossible to place a cell phone call—and these were said to be cell phone calls—from a speeding aircraft at that altitude. AT&T admits as much and calls the ten cell phone supposedly made from Flight 93 a “fluke” (more like a miracle). According to American Airline and Qualcomm, the technology for cell phone transmission at high altitude was first available this year, not 2001. How do you explain these cell phone calls? I have a few ideas, but you’d probably call me a nutcase, a fruitcake, a lemming and a scam artist. <br><br>“In another month, a film about Flight 93 opens around the country. It will serve as a painful reminder of what really happened on that day—a true story far different from the pitiful conspiracy theories advanced by those who wish the milk the tragedy for their own benefit.” <br><br>Actually, it makes perfect sense for Hollywood to make a version of the fairy tale you believe as gospel truth. Meanwhile, those of us worried about the future of America will “milk the tragedy” for our “own benefit” while the stockholders at whatever movie corporation producing this Brothers Grimm fantasy will go penniless. <br><br>“Later this year, Oliver Stone, the top conspiracy-theorist in this country, releases his own film on the World Trade Center. But Stone, who could find a conspiracy in the rising of the sun, could not find one from that fateful day and his film will be, instead, a tribute to the first responders.”<br><br>Ah, Oliver Stone. I figured we’d get around to him. Most Americans believe there was a conspiracy behind the assassination of JFK, a fact well portrayed in Stone’s film. I don’t recall Stone finding conspiracies “in the rising of the sun” or elsewhere. As for those first responders Stone will make his latest film about, a few of them have problems with the official version you embrace so adamantly. For instance, Louie Cacchioli, one of the first firefighters to enter the South Tower, reported hearing explosions. “On the last trip up a bomb went off. We think there were bombs set in the building,” he said. In fact, FDNY fire fighters are under a gag order to not discuss the explosions they heard, felt and saw. But don’t worry, Doug. I don’t think Stone will include their stories in his “tribute” (and of course, unlike us scam artists, he will not make a cent off this epic). <br><br>“Those who prey on fear and paranoia to promote their kooky conspiracy theories dishonor those passengers on Flight 93. They dishonor the innocent victims who died on that day and the first responders who lost their lives trying to save those victims…. And they dishonor America.”<br><br>Few of us are preying “on fear and paranoia” to promote “kooky conspiracy theories,” unless you consider physics kooky science (jet fuel cannot melt steel—although it does in Bushzarro world, where Doug Thompson lives, a realm where the world is flat and cell phones work miles above cell phone towers). All we want is the truth, Doug—and what you and the Bushites are doling out is certainly not the truth. Dare I say, you should be ashamed of yourself for not only buying into the official fairy tale but dissing those of us out here asking questions as self-serving flim-flam artists. <br><br>Since we will not shut up and go away until we get the truth, I suggest you turn your attention to other subjects over at Capitol Hill Blue, subjects not likely to offend Verizon and Best Western. <br><br><br> <p></p><i></i>
darkbeforedawn
 

Re: So WHO is dishonoring the victims here?

Postby chiggerbit » Sun Apr 16, 2006 12:46 am

I caught not only Doug's rant there at Capitol Hill Blues, but also this from some chick there at his site. BTW, the page cannot be found, unlike any other from that week, month, year(?). I have only this much because I get the site mailed to me, and what is in the body of the email can't be taken away from me, just what it is linked to. Her two big reasons for dissing even the possibility of conspiracy theories were WHAT? (Sorry, have to do this quick, between storm fronts.) I may not have yet bought into MIHOP, but the answer to both her questions, DUH, are..... money, hunny. Who is this Capitol Hill Blues chick, anyway? <br><br>Topping today's Blue...<br><br>So many conspiracy theories, so little reality -- <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>What the conspiracy theorists won't answer is why our government would do such a thing as 9/11</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> -- and more to the point, <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>if it committed this terrible crime and then, essentially, got away with it, why hasn't it "finished" the job?</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> Conspiracy theorists repeatedly claim that no one can answer why there are so MANY conspiracy theorists, so that alone gives their theories credence.<br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.capitolhillblue.com/content/2006/04/so_many_conspiracy_theories_so.html">www.capitolhillblue.com/c...es_so.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br> <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=chiggerbit@rigorousintuition>chiggerbit</A> at: 4/16/06 6:04 pm<br></i>
chiggerbit
 
Posts: 8594
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 12:23 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: So WHO is dishonoring the victims here?

Postby Hugh Manatee Wins » Sun Apr 16, 2006 1:03 am

Doug Thompson is a self-described libertarian who chewed on the Clinton White House and chews on the Bush White House, too.<br><br>But to dismiss LIHOP or MIHOP is just plain dishonest if he really looked into it.<br><br>More likely, he's too well known (vulnerable) in DC to be slinging the whole truth and works within 'normalized' parameters of discourse.<br><br>Lots of journalists seem to have taken the easy out and embraced the cover story to keep their conventional reputations.<br><br>There's a lot of that goin' 'round. <br>Courage has a price in DC. Sometimes the ultimate price. <p></p><i></i>
User avatar
Hugh Manatee Wins
 
Posts: 9869
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 6:51 pm
Location: in context
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: So WHO is dishonoring the victims here?

Postby stickdog99 » Sun Apr 16, 2006 2:33 am

I'm guessing that poor Doug is on the up and up, but his intellectual acumen is no match for his preconceived biases nor his cognitive dissonance. Analysis of his "arguments" concerning the events of 9/11 (combined with his out-of-hand dismissals of and visceral anger toward anyone who questions his point of view) leads me to believe that he is the proverbial "useful idiot." <p></p><i></i>
stickdog99
 
Posts: 6673
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 5:42 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: So WHO is dishonoring the victims here?

Postby Qutb » Sun Apr 16, 2006 9:29 am

Kurt Nimmo said - <br><br><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>"As for those first responders Stone will make his latest film about, a few of them have problems with the official version you embrace so adamantly. For instance, Louie Cacchioli, one of the first firefighters to enter the South Tower, reported hearing explosions."</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--><br><br>This is a good example of the typical dishonesty of the mihoppers. Louie Cacchioli has never said he has problems with the official version. <p></p><i></i>
Qutb
 
Posts: 1203
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 2:28 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

firefighters explicitly told to shut up

Postby darkbeforedawn » Sun Apr 16, 2006 9:45 am

There are many accounts of the pressure the NYFD folks are under from their employers (the mayor etc.) to keep their opinions to themselves if they wanted to keep their jobs and be able to earn a living and support their families.. <p></p><i></i>
darkbeforedawn
 

Re: firefighters explicitly told to shut up

Postby sunny » Sun Apr 16, 2006 11:49 am

Qutb, <br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://blogfiles.wfmu.org/AK/firefighter_hears_underground_booms.pdf">blogfiles.wfmu.org/AK/fir..._booms.pdf</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>September 12, 2001<br>New York City<br>Louie Cacchioli, 51, is a firefighter assigned to<br>Engine 47 in Harlem.<br>We were the first ones in the second tower after the<br>plane struck. I was taking firefighters up in the<br>elevator to the 24th floor to get in position to<br>evacuate workers. <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>On the last trip up a bomb went<br>off. We think there was bombs set in the building.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> I<br>had just asked another firefighter to stay with me,<br>which was a good thing because we were trapped<br>inside the elevator and he had the tools to get out.<br>There were probably 500 people trapped in the<br>stairwell. It was mass chaos. The power went out. It<br>was dark. Everybody was screaming. We had<br>oxygen masks and we were giving people oxygen.<br>Some of us made it out and some of us didn't. I know<br>of at least 30 firefighters who are still missing. <br>____________________________________________________<br><br>Where are you getting the information that Cacchioli <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>did not</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> say this?<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.zmag.org/interactive/content/display_item.cfm?itemID=3787">www.zmag.org/interactive/...temID=3787</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br><br><br> <p></p><i></i>
sunny
 
Posts: 5220
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 10:18 pm
Location: Alabama
Blog: View Blog (1)

firemen are silent now...

Postby darkbeforedawn » Sun Apr 16, 2006 12:31 pm

What they say now after taking a long hard look at their need to put food on their tables etc. is very different from the spontaneous witnesses reports by firemen on the day of the attack and shortly thereafter. Which are more accurate? People who believe what folks say when their jobs and livelihoods are at stake are the same crowd who think "rendition" a legitimate way to gather information. Unfortunately, our media is anxious to give credence to both--torture "confessions" and guys desperate to support their families. Makes you wonder about the media and the folks like Qutb who are so willing to back them up. <p></p><i></i>
darkbeforedawn
 

Thompson deletes own editorial on 911

Postby darkbeforedawn » Sun Apr 16, 2006 4:24 pm

<!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://kurtnimmo.com/?p=337">kurtnimmo.com/?p=337</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br>Waiting for Doug Thompson to Change his Mind <br>Sunday April 16th 2006, 6:24 am <br><br>Doug Thompson of Capitol Hill Blue has changed the link to his article taking nine eleven truth seekers to task, characterizing them as fools and scam artists. Now the original link points to an article criticizing a Bush “panoply” of “police cars, multiple limos, staff vans, Secret Service SUVs, a helicopter overhead” accompanying the unelected one to a community college for a talk on prescription drugs. In an April 15 explanation of sorts, Thompson admits removing columns, including “three on 9-11 and two on President Bush. The links remain active but the columns have been replaced with a noticed (sic) that the content has been deleted from our archives.” <br><br>If there was a notice about removing material, Thompson did not bother to add it to the page where the nine eleven researcher as “fruitcake” article once appeared. “In recent days, I have penned some angry columns—over the top even for me. I also asked some friends who are writers, editors and journalism professors to review the archives of Capitol Hill Blue to see if any columns or articles didn’t meet what they consider to be acceptable standards of journalism,” Thompson explains in an article entitled An apology to our readers.<br><br>“Their first report came in today and they found a number of recent Rants that they felt crossed the line or, in their opinion, were written when Amy and I were preoccupied with the declining health and approaching death of our brain-damaged kitten, Loki… Amy and I have spent the last six months trying to save Loki and I was unaware of the toll the battle was taking on my psyche, particularly in recent weeks,” Thompson writes. <br><br>It is certainly understandable that Doug Thompson would be angry and even lash out irrationally at the prospect of the “painful decision” (as he wrote elsewhere) to euthanize his pet. “Truth is not served by off-the-cuff rants and I have been striking out in anger at many people in recent days because of grief and that is not right. I misdirected the anger and frustration I felt over our inability to save a pet. That is not right.” Fair enough. However, this does not address the issue at hand—does Thompson sincerely believe those of us who are dedicated to discovering the truth—the whole truth and nothing but the truth, to use an old cliché—are mental patients and snake oil salespersons? <br><br>Thompson holds out a bit of hope: “I’m taking a break until we have put Loki’s death behind us. When that is done I will revisit the topics I wrote about before and, hopefully, write about them in a more coherent and reasoned way.” <br><br>I don’t know. I find it difficult to believe the death of a pet would change the basic conviction of a person about a certain event—it may change the delivery and tone, but not the underlying belief. It would be nice to read a column next week from Thompson where he expresses doubt about the official version of nine eleven events—after all, only an irrational person ignorant of the facts would buy the whitewash commission version, basically a fairy tale at odds with science and physical law as we understand it on this planet.<br><br>I’m not holding my breath. <br><br>“The conspiracy claims by those who say Osama bin Laden and his rabid band of followers could not possibly have planned and executed the attacks that killed more than 3,000 Americans on that fateful day are, in my opinion, just plain wrong,” Thompson wrote in his original column, now excised. Again, I’m not sure if this bullheaded claim was penned as the result of the impending death of Doug’s pet or if he actually believes the Muslims with laptops in an Afghan cave storyline, basically and obviously an absurdity. <br><br>“I can state,” former German Minister of Technology, Andreas von Bülow, told Tagesspiegel in early 2002, “the planning of the attacks was technically and organizationally a master achievement. To hijack four huge airplanes within a few minutes and within one hour, to drive them into their targets, with complicated flight maneuvers! This is unthinkable, without years-long support from secret apparatuses of the state and industry…. Even investigative journalists are fed propaganda and disinformation. Anyone who doubts that, doesn’t have all his marbles!” <br><br>We can only hope, with his grief behind him, Doug Thompson will find his marbles.<br><br><br> <p></p><i></i>
darkbeforedawn
 

Re: Thompson deletes own editorial on 911

Postby greencrow0 » Sun Apr 16, 2006 4:37 pm

“<!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>I’m taking a break until we have put Loki’s death behind us.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> <br><br>Hopefully Doug will regain his sense of perspective regarding the deaths of 3,000 innocents on 9/11 and the death of his cat. <p></p><i></i>
greencrow0
 
Posts: 1481
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2005 5:42 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Thompson deletes own editorial on 911

Postby StarmanSkye » Sun Apr 16, 2006 5:07 pm

"However, this does not address the issue at hand—does Thompson sincerely believe those of us who are dedicated to discovering the truth—the whole truth and nothing but the truth, to use an old cliché—are mental patients and snake oil salespersons?" -- Nimmo <br><br><br>My take is that Thompson may be suffering acute cognitive dissonance at the enormous paradigm challenge to someone who is confronting evidence for how unspeakably foul, monstrous and criminal the current regime is that could pull-off the evil betrayal and mass-murder which was 911 -- and he's in denial over the cause of his extreme discomfort, lashing out at the Truth Movement as if they were the cause <br>-- or ELSE he's little more than a neocon dupe/shill, and perhaps his angry rant was a test balloon to check the temperature of blogsphere conviction that 911 was an inside job. When he found such an outraged reaction to his column by the cyber-alternative public who resented by dismissed as cranks, kooks and disinfo-snakeoil opportunists, he had to make an abrupt retraction-by-guile in order to salvage his credibility.<br><br>From my POV -- I sure am suspicious of someone using such a lame excuse as the chronic illness and not-unexpected death of a pet as an excuse for a deplorable editorial judgement.<br>To me, it makes as much sense as blaming his lapse on emotional turmoil over whether to repaint his bedroom walls pale blue or medium ceruleum blue.<br><br>Starman <p></p><i></i>
StarmanSkye
 
Posts: 2670
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 11:32 pm
Location: State of Jefferson
Blog: View Blog (0)

Thompson

Postby sunny » Sun Apr 16, 2006 6:33 pm

"left" blogging not long ago, then returned, without explanation (that I recall). Later, he revealed he had received a "National Security Letter" <br>Some serious stress going on with him, alot of which we probably can't even guess at. <p></p><i></i>
sunny
 
Posts: 5220
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 10:18 pm
Location: Alabama
Blog: View Blog (1)

Re: Thompson

Postby 4911 » Sun Apr 16, 2006 6:44 pm

there are layers and layers. Maybe his ends where ours begins. The onion of dissent is manifold and omniverous. Now. Now. Now. <p></p><i></i>
4911
 
Posts: 673
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2006 9:34 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Thompson

Postby stickdog99 » Sun Apr 16, 2006 7:00 pm

Usenet folks have to be wondering if Doug named the cat after himself ... <p></p><i></i>
stickdog99
 
Posts: 6673
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 5:42 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: So WHO is dishonoring the victims here?

Postby pugzleyca3 » Sun Apr 16, 2006 7:09 pm

Thompson recently went on a rant about how the Department of Homeland Security was giving him a ration of grief about his website and tried to obtain his records, how he had to retain a lawyer, etc.<br><br>I haven't been reading his site long enough to know if he's ever confronted the 9/11 issue before. Has he? <br><br>Maybe I'm wrong, but it looks damn funny to me he starts this very shortly after he claims the government was getting into his business.<br><br>Yeah, I know, I'm just a wild eyed conspiracy theorist. <p></p><i></i>
pugzleyca3
 
Posts: 726
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 4:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Next

Return to 9/11

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests