Political Crossfire Forums

[Claudia Schiffer]

O.K. I admit it, Osama is really stupid, and he gave the opportunity of a life time to the Neocons to execute their plans for control of the middle east resources. :roll:..pure luck!

How do you think history will look at this? :wink:

[Patriot911]

psholtz wrote: Patriot911 wrote: psholtz wrote: Patriot911 wrote: The "evidence" provided by the "good professor" is highly questionable to begin with. He has yet to provide his paper for peer review and has since been suspended because of it.
That paper has already been peer-reviewed 3 times.

He was suspended b/c a false, libelous, slanderous hit piece written against him by a neocon accusing him of fomenting a violent revolution against the government.. such which is completely untrue.

bulls**t. The paper has not been peer reviewed at all which is why he has been suspended. Look on the BYU web site.
Where on the BYU Web site?

Nobody in the academic world has ever been fired just b/c they had a paper that didn't get peer-reviewed. That's absurd, and if that's the excuse they're using publicly, it betrays to you just how cowardly and terrified those in power have truly become.

:roll: Are you COMPLETELY incapable of your own research?!? http://newsnet.byu.edu/story.cfm/60800

[Patriot911]

Claudia Schiffer wrote: O.K. I admit it, Osama is really stupid, and he gave the opportunity of a life time to the Neocons to execute their plans for control of the middle east resources. :roll:..pure luck!

How do you think history will look at this? :wink:

Like Osama was really stupid and his little plan backfired. He thought we would cut and run like we did every other time he stood up to us. How was he to know Bush wasn't going to just lob a couple cruise missiles and forget about it? He has even commented on this very topic.

Unfortunately for you, your assertion that "the neocons" have control of Middle East resources is about as accurate as your normal statements, which is to say completely wrong and unfounded.

[Medius]

Patriot911 wrote: psholtz wrote: Patriot911 wrote: The "evidence" provided by the "good professor" is highly questionable to begin with. He has yet to provide his paper for peer review and has since been suspended because of it.
That paper has already been peer-reviewed 3 times.

He was suspended b/c a false, libelous, slanderous hit piece written against him by a neocon accusing him of fomenting a violent revolution against the government.. such which is completely untrue.

bulls**t. The paper has not been peer reviewed at all which is why he has been suspended. Look on the BYU web site.

Just a couple of points. Steven Jones is not Alex Jones (this is to an earlier comment, not you Patriot).

Steven Jones' work has been peer reviewed three times. The investigation is to determine if he has stepped out of his field and if more publishing should have taken place in academic journals prior to any contact with the media. Here is a quick quote from BYU:

Quote: "BYU remains concerned that Dr. Jones' work on this topic has not been published in appropriate scientific venues," the statement said.

I can't honestly tell you whether his findings are correct as they are based on physical evidence which I do not have access to (nor would I have the equipment or expertise to make a spectral analysis of the residue).

What I can tell you is that has access to only a small sampling of metal that had been handled and transported prior to his access. This means that there is both a chance that the metal was contaiminated or that more damning evidence was knocked or cleaned off.

Based on the background of Steven Jones, I would find it unlikely that he would manufacture evidence and it also seems likely that he would be thorough before making a claim (for instance, I would think he has examined for traces of thermite from within the metal rather than the surface to make the chance of contamination highly unlikely).

The chain of evidence is exactly why he requested to the sending parties that they not tamper with any of the additional material as it may be able to be put through a proper chain of evidence in the future.

The bottom line is that there really isn't enough information available as nearly all of the physical evidence has been shipped off or destroyed. Whether this was for expediency or a cover-up, I couldn't tell you.

[The Comrade]

psholtz wrote: William Amos wrote: PeterX wrote: Profesor Steven Jones of Brigham Young University found traces of thermate in physical samples of WTC debris.

Placed in the right areas thermate would have no problem burning through the girders which supported the WTC.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/june2006/200606scientificanalysis.htm

Sorry I dont trust that good professor.
Well see... This is where it all breaks down into something of an absurdity.

You ask for "evidence".. So someone brings to you evidence from a well-respected professor from a well-respected university, and you just say you don't "trust" the professor..

OK .. what do you trust? Who do you trust?

What would convince you? Would anything convince you?

You keep asking for evidence, and yet when evidence of the highest and most impeccable caliber is brought to you, you just close your eyes and refuse to look at it.

If you're going to be that way, why bother starting any threads at all? What's there to discuss?


Quote: Quote:
Alex Jones's 2005 release Martial Law 9/11 Rise of the Police State highlighted the physical evidence that the towers and Building 7 were brought down with incendiary devices


Nah he isnt biased at all !
So what if he's biased?

People are supposed to biased.

It's the Newspeak-Doublethink mind-job that Fox is pulling on you by telling you (a) they're fair-and-balanced when (b) they're nothing of the sort that's really confusing you.

Nothing in this world is free from bias.. (Least of all you, I might - politely - add)

Get used to it.



my psychology teacher brought up something interesting today.


researches lie. alot. especially professors and the lot like them. they make biased studies and investigations sometimes.

why you might ask? because they have a theory, and they want it to be right no matter what. if that means playing loose with the truth, or lying by omittion, then so be it.

[psholtz]

The Comrade wrote: researches lie. alot. especially professors and the lot like them. they make biased studies and investigations sometimes.
I know that researchers lie a lot.

That's why I choose to abandon a potential career in academia about 12 years ago..

Most "research" that is done in the universities of this nation is a lie and a sham.. Medical "research" is just a sham designed to inflate the incident rate of cash-cows like cancer and AIDS illnesses.. it's also a sham for big pharma to keep beta-testing toxic bioweapons on an unsuspecting population (usually lower-income populations on welfare, or else anyplace in the Third World, African landmass, etc). Chemical research is the same.. mostly aimed at chemical weapons development, or genetically-modified foods (designed to kill you). Physics research is just a total joke. Einstein's relativity "theory" is a fraud and everything done since in physics has been little more than an elaborate lie and an elaborate excuse to waste taxpayer billions on super-cyclotrons adn super-stupid theories like 10-dimensional strings that even proponents admit could never be experimentally tested or verified.

Btw, about 98% of all funding for all universities in America flows directly out of DARPA ... so university "research" is little more than an excuse for the military kill more people.

Know how your enemy is... this is extremely important.

That said, I feel that you have an extremely poor sense of discernment when it comes to ferreting out such research lies -- or at least you do if you believe that Steven Jones is one such liar.

[The Comrade]

upon reading the points brought up by patriot and amos i do indeed believe he is lying by omittion, or just flat out ****.


also, about DARPA.


although i think your banker theories are rediculous, i personally find DARPA to be one of the stealthiest and dangerous entities in the united states.

[psholtz]

Patriot911 wrote: Like Osama was really stupid and his little plan backfired. He thought we would cut and run like we did every other time he stood up to us. How was he to know Bush wasn't going to just lob a couple cruise missiles and forget about it? He has even commented on this very topic.


I'm still free! How about you??


You make it sound like we actually might have .... *hurt* ... OBL in all this or something.. :?

What, pray tell, has OBL actually *lost* in all this broo-ha-ha? His family has won a number of very handsome construction contracts to build U.S. military bases throughout the Middle East. This much we know.. But we - pray tell - has OBL "lost" in all this?

[psholtz]

The Comrade wrote: also, about DARPA.


although i think your banker theories are rediculous, i personally find DARPA to be one of the stealthiest and dangerous entities in the united states.
I concur...

And they are *everywhere* in the academic establishment in this nation..

You do the math (no pun intended..)

[The Comrade]

psholtz wrote: Patriot911 wrote: Like Osama was really stupid and his little plan backfired. He thought we would cut and run like we did every other time he stood up to us. How was he to know Bush wasn't going to just lob a couple cruise missiles and forget about it? He has even commented on this very topic.


I'm still free! How about you??


You make it sound like we actually might have .... *hurt* ... OBL in all this or something.. :?

What, pray tell, has OBL actually *lost* in all this broo-ha-ha? His family has won a number of very handsome construction contracts to build U.S. military bases throughout the Middle East. This much we know.. But we - pray tell - has OBL "lost" in all this?


one cannot lose something when they had nothing to be taken away to begin with.

[psholtz]

Patriot911 wrote: psholtz wrote: Patriot911 wrote: psholtz wrote: Patriot911 wrote: The "evidence" provided by the "good professor" is highly questionable to begin with. He has yet to provide his paper for peer review and has since been suspended because of it.
That paper has already been peer-reviewed 3 times.

He was suspended b/c a false, libelous, slanderous hit piece written against him by a neocon accusing him of fomenting a violent revolution against the government.. such which is completely untrue.

bulls**t. The paper has not been peer reviewed at all which is why he has been suspended. Look on the BYU web site.
Where on the BYU Web site?

Nobody in the academic world has ever been fired just b/c they had a paper that didn't get peer-reviewed. That's absurd, and if that's the excuse they're using publicly, it betrays to you just how cowardly and terrified those in power have truly become.

:roll: Are you COMPLETELY incapable of your own research?!? http://newsnet.byu.edu/story.cfm/60800
Interesting spin..

As per what's already been posted on this thread, you do realize that BYU's pursestrings (esp in the physics department) are held by DARPA, yes? And you do realize that DARPA is part of the Pentagon, yes? And you do realize who it is that we are accusing of having carried out the attacks of 9/11, yes?

I'll give you a hint..

The criminal provacateurs behind 9/11 work in an office building that looks something like this:



Is this kind of spin really all that surprising to you?

[psholtz]

The Comrade wrote: one cannot lose something when they had nothing to be taken away to begin with.
Then do you care to explain Patriot911's rant for us? :lol:

[Medius]

The Comrade wrote: upon reading the points brought up by patriot and amos i do indeed believe he is lying by omittion, or just flat out ****.


also, about DARPA.


although i think your banker theories are rediculous, i personally find DARPA to be one of the stealthiest and dangerous entities in the united states.

I think most of the problems Steven Jones may have is simply being taken out of context or possibly being fed false data (which he has been clear about not having a proper chain of evidence on the metal residue he has obtained).

If you read up on his background, he has shown to be a trustworthy academic in the past. While other professors at BYU were suggesting that they had created cold-fusion and solved the world's energy problems, he was a clear dissenter. Rather than pushing along with them to gain false academic fame, he clearly stated that the findings at the time were insufficient to cure any problem and would take may years before even the smallest applications were possible (such as powering a flashlight).

I don't defend him for his 9/11 research, but rather, because he is a human being who has shown himself to be ethical in the past. I think it would be better to give him the benefit of the doubt and attack the actual weak point, which is the sample itself.

[The Comrade]

psholtz wrote: The Comrade wrote: one cannot lose something when they had nothing to be taken away to begin with.
Then do you care to explain Patriot911's rant for us? :lol:


i don't claim to know what patriot was getting at, merely adding my own two cents.

[PheelGoodInc]

psholtz wrote:


I'm still free! How about you??


You make it sound like we actually might have .... *hurt* ... OBL in all this or something.. :?

What, pray tell, has OBL actually *lost* in all this broo-ha-ha? His family has won a number of very handsome construction contracts to build U.S. military bases throughout the Middle East. This much we know.. But we - pray tell - has OBL "lost" in all this?

He's in hiding, or dead. He's cooked up in a cave somewhere if he is alive. His accounts have been frozen, and he can't even use sattelite phones or the internet. Tell me he's not hurting? :lol:

[psholtz]

PheelGoodInc wrote: He's cooked up in a cave somewhere if he is alive. His accounts have been frozen, and he can't even use sattelite phones or the internet. Tell me he's not hurting? :lol:
If he can't use the Internet or use a phone, then why are we doing electronic surveillance here in this nation?

I thought the only reason NSA was screening domestic calls was for when OBL decides to "phone home" to America..

Are you trying to tell me that this .. *gasp* .. might not be true?

[The Comrade]

Medius wrote: The Comrade wrote: upon reading the points brought up by patriot and amos i do indeed believe he is lying by omittion, or just flat out ****.


also, about DARPA.


although i think your banker theories are rediculous, i personally find DARPA to be one of the stealthiest and dangerous entities in the united states.

I think most of the problems Steven Jones may have is simply being taken out of context or possibly being fed false data (which he has been clear about not having a proper chain of evidence on the metal residue he has obtained).

If you read up on his background, he has shown to be a trustworthy academic in the past. While other professors at BYU were suggesting that they had created cold-fusion and solved the world's energy problems, he was a clear dissenter. Rather than pushing along with them to gain false academic fame, he clearly stated that the findings at the time were insufficient to cure any problem and would take may years before even the smallest applications were possible (such as powering a flashlight).

I don't defend him for his 9/11 research, but rather, because he is a human being who has shown himself to be ethical in the past. I think it would be better to give him the benefit of the doubt and attack the actual weak point, which is the sample itself.

is his field in chemistry and engineering?

many people, well known and respected in their fields, have won honors as high as the nobel prize based on false/faulty research(sometimes not even regarding their professional field of expertise).

[psholtz]

The Comrade wrote: is his field in chemistry and engineering?
I think it's physics..

[The Comrade]

psholtz wrote: PheelGoodInc wrote: He's cooked up in a cave somewhere if he is alive. His accounts have been frozen, and he can't even use sattelite phones or the internet. Tell me he's not hurting? :lol:
If he can't use the Internet or use a phone, then why are we doing electronic surveillance here in this nation?

I thought the only reason NSA was screening domestic calls was for when OBL decides to "phone home" to America..

Are you trying to tell me that this .. *gasp* .. might not be true?

the reason for electronic survelliance is to spot sleeper cells before they're found.

[The Comrade]

psholtz wrote: The Comrade wrote: is his field in chemistry and engineering?
I think it's physics..

then why is he doing a study on something a chemist or an engineer should be doing?