[FairfieldLife] Re: 911?, "victims of their own karma", Maharishi

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seekliberation"  
wrote:
>
> MMY always pointed out that every time something bad happens
> to America, it's because of our bad karma.  He never really 
> explained why Afghanistan has had such atrocities for the last
> 50 years or why India has been such a poverty stricken area
> for so long.  I could go on all day about horrific occurrences 
> throughout the world that MMY never explained in terms of that 
> nation having bad karma.   
> 
> So I guess my question is..why is MMY so selective to point
> out our bad karma when it is quite obvious our bad karma isn't 
> nearly as bad as most other countries?  (that is of course
> assuming that karma is the primary reason for each nation's
> well-being or lack thereof).

Just a guess: what's called American exceptionalism, a
sort of national hubris that enormously magnifies our
negative karma by inspiring outrage rather than self-
examination when bad things happen to us.

 
> seekliberation
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "wgm4u"  wrote:
> > >
> > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHDuhRn16Tg
> > > 
> > > The Rape of Nan-King- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YoW2WYdOsvg
> > > 
> > > The Holocast-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8KJ6-J2wAw&feature=related
> > >
> > 
> > Are you suggesting that the law of karma should
> > not apply to representatives of some particular religion,
> > or whatever?? :o

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911?, "victims of their own karma", Maharishi

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seekliberation"  
wrote:
>
> MMY always pointed out that every time something bad happens to America, it's 
> because of our bad karma.  He never really explained why Afghanistan has had 
> such atrocities for the last 50 years or why India has been such a poverty 
> stricken area for so long.


He did. He said it was because of widespread superstition which hindered 
development like in the West.

  
I could go on all day about horrific occurrences throughout the world that MMY 
never explained in terms of that nation having bad karma. 

Should he spend all his time explaining the problems here, there and everywhere 
?

  
> 
> So I guess my question is..why is MMY so selective to point out our bad 
> karma when it is quite obvious our bad karma isn't nearly as bad as most 
> other countries?


Because he had better things to do, like saving the planet.

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911?, "victims of their own karma", Maharishi

[seekliberation]

MMY always pointed out that every time something bad happens to America, it's 
because of our bad karma.  He never really explained why Afghanistan has had 
such atrocities for the last 50 years or why India has been such a poverty 
stricken area for so long.  I could go on all day about horrific occurrences 
throughout the world that MMY never explained in terms of that nation having 
bad karma.   

So I guess my question is..why is MMY so selective to point out our bad 
karma when it is quite obvious our bad karma isn't nearly as bad as most other 
countries?  (that is of course assuming that karma is the primary reason for 
each nation's well-being or lack thereof).

seekliberation

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "wgm4u"  wrote:
> >
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHDuhRn16Tg
> > 
> > The Rape of Nan-King- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YoW2WYdOsvg
> > 
> > The Holocast-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8KJ6-J2wAw&feature=related
> >
> 
> Are you suggesting that the law of karma should
> not apply to representatives of some particular religion,
> or whatever?? :o
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911?, "victims of their own karma", Maharishi

[cardemaister]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "wgm4u"  wrote:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHDuhRn16Tg
> 
> The Rape of Nan-King- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YoW2WYdOsvg
> 
> The Holocast-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8KJ6-J2wAw&feature=related
>

Are you suggesting that the law of karma should
not apply to representatives of some particular religion,
or whatever?? :o

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 Towers had several explosions -- new video footage reveals.

[whynotnow7]

I don't think it was in any way a blatant conspiracy. I do recall Condaleeza 
Rice's first comments on the news about it. She said they knew a plane could be 
hijacked, but had no idea someone would fly it into a building (!). So the way 
I read it is that the PNAC cabal was picking up intel of an impending action 
against the US and let it happen so they could unleash the American war machine 
again, this time in Iraq. I don't think they knew the specifics of 911. Then 
again, they weren't too concerned about how a hostile action against the US 
might manifest, since they were planning to use it as a catalyst for war, 
regardless.  



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>
> On 06/09/2011 12:49 PM, WillyTex wrote:
> >
> >>> It doesn't make any sense that anyone but a fringe
> >>> nutcase would believe this, but it looks like a few
> >>> FFL informants really do believe in doomsday scenarios.
> >>>
> > Bhairitu:
> >> Boy you have no ability to see the bigger picture, do
> >> you?
> >>
> > To plant hidden explosives inside the WTC, to explode
> > AFTER the planes hit, someone would have had to bypass
> > all the video cameras and security inside the WTC.
> >
> > But, that feat would pale in comparison to getting over
> > 5,000 government employees to keep the conspiracy a
> > secret! Have you seen any Wiki-leaks that could support
> > any of your WTC conspiracy theories?
> 
> Uh-huh.  Just as I thought, you haven't even looked at any of the 
> speculation on 9-11.  Part of the scenario were some "remodeling" on the 
> building prior to 9-11 that lead to some areas being closed and 
> allegedly that was when the explosives were planted.  I guess you assume 
> some janitor might have alerted authorities.  5000 government employees 
> wouldn't have been involved.  Only a couple hundred at best and most so 
> compartmentalized that they had no idea of their involvement.
> 
> A lot of people don't want to take a position other than the "official 
> conspiracy theory" on 9-11 even though there was a lot of evidence it 
> was a false flag event because they don't want their bruise their egos 
> and be called a "conspiracy theorist".  I could give a shit.
> 
> Anyway keep waiting for Santa, the Easter Bunny and that Maharishi was a 
> member of the X-Men. :-D
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 911 Towers had several explosions -- new video footage reveals.

[Bhairitu]

On 06/09/2011 12:49 PM, WillyTex wrote:
>
>>> It doesn't make any sense that anyone but a fringe
>>> nutcase would believe this, but it looks like a few
>>> FFL informants really do believe in doomsday scenarios.
>>>
> Bhairitu:
>> Boy you have no ability to see the bigger picture, do
>> you?
>>
> To plant hidden explosives inside the WTC, to explode
> AFTER the planes hit, someone would have had to bypass
> all the video cameras and security inside the WTC.
>
> But, that feat would pale in comparison to getting over
> 5,000 government employees to keep the conspiracy a
> secret! Have you seen any Wiki-leaks that could support
> any of your WTC conspiracy theories?

Uh-huh.  Just as I thought, you haven't even looked at any of the 
speculation on 9-11.  Part of the scenario were some "remodeling" on the 
building prior to 9-11 that lead to some areas being closed and 
allegedly that was when the explosives were planted.  I guess you assume 
some janitor might have alerted authorities.  5000 government employees 
wouldn't have been involved.  Only a couple hundred at best and most so 
compartmentalized that they had no idea of their involvement.

A lot of people don't want to take a position other than the "official 
conspiracy theory" on 9-11 even though there was a lot of evidence it 
was a false flag event because they don't want their bruise their egos 
and be called a "conspiracy theorist".  I could give a shit.

Anyway keep waiting for Santa, the Easter Bunny and that Maharishi was a 
member of the X-Men. :-D

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 Towers had several explosions -- new video footage reveals.

[WillyTex]

> > It doesn't make any sense that anyone but a fringe
> > nutcase would believe this, but it looks like a few
> > FFL informants really do believe in doomsday scenarios.
> >
Bhairitu: 
> Boy you have no ability to see the bigger picture, do 
> you? 
>
To plant hidden explosives inside the WTC, to explode 
AFTER the planes hit, someone would have had to bypass 
all the video cameras and security inside the WTC. 

But, that feat would pale in comparison to getting over 
5,000 government employees to keep the conspiracy a 
secret! Have you seen any Wiki-leaks that could support
any of your WTC conspiracy theories?

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 911 Towers had several explosions -- new video footage reveals.

[Bhairitu]

On 06/09/2011 09:14 AM, Duveyoung wrote:
> Bhairitu wrote:
>
> "Now Edg, you know on FFL you've got to connect that somehow to whether  the 
> world is going to end and FFL'ers didn't even make it to CC.   Obviously 
> looking at the hot topics here that's whats really important,  not the 
> biggest bank heist in the history of the world.  Or that this  summer is 
> going to be a riot. ;-)"
>
>
> Okay, how about, "the Maharishi Effect didn't prevent it" as the 
> conversational nexus?
>
> Or, "Those firemen were probably so stressed up from the experience that 
> virtually all their elephants were deeply sleeping and needing much rest to 
> heal, so therefore these firemen were speaking straight from pure being in 
> that no elephant was stomping around producing non-natural thoughts; 
> therefore: their testimony is indisputable."
>
> Or, "Did anyone notice that Turq was conveniently out of the country when it 
> all happened?"
>
> Or, "Where's all this extra extra powerful force that Maharishi was supposed 
> to become after he shed the body which was taking up so much of his mojo?  
> Shouldn't he have reversed time by now?"
>
> Or, "If you play this video backwards, one can clearly hear "The Beatles did 
> it in revenge against Sexy Sadie."
>
> Need more?
>
> Edg

Or maybe just titling the thread "Did Free Will Lead to 9-11?" :-D

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 911 Towers had several explosions -- new video footage reveals.

[Bhairitu]

On 06/09/2011 09:39 AM, WillyTex wrote:
>
> Bhairitu:
>> Now Edg, you know on FFL you've got to connect that
>> somehow to whether the world is going to end..
>>
> So, you're thinking that explosives were planted in the
> WTC and timed to go off at almost the exact time the
> planes hit the WTC? How would anyone know WHEN EXACTLY
> the planes would hit the building, so they could activate
> the explosions AFTER but no BEFORE the planes hit?
>
> We all know that the disastrous attack has been planned
> and executed by the American CIA and the Israeli Mossad,
> right? So that the U.S. and it's allies could accuse
> the Taliban and then invade Afghanistan?
>
> So, for what reason would the U.S. invade Iraq, since
> it is obvious that Saddam had nothing to do with the WTC
> attack of 9/11? To drive the world to 'doomsday' by
> starting World War III?
>
> It doesn't make any sense that anyone but a fringe
> nutcase would believe this, but it looks like a few
> FFL informants really do believe in doomsday scenarios.
>
> Go figure.

Boy you have no ability to see the bigger picture, do you?   You must 
have missed that sidhi. :-D

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 Towers had several explosions -- new video footage reveals.

[WillyTex]

Bhairitu:
> Now Edg, you know on FFL you've got to connect that 
> somehow to whether the world is going to end..
>
So, you're thinking that explosives were planted in the 
WTC and timed to go off at almost the exact time the 
planes hit the WTC? How would anyone know WHEN EXACTLY 
the planes would hit the building, so they could activate 
the explosions AFTER but no BEFORE the planes hit?

We all know that the disastrous attack has been planned 
and executed by the American CIA and the Israeli Mossad, 
right? So that the U.S. and it's allies could accuse 
the Taliban and then invade Afghanistan? 

So, for what reason would the U.S. invade Iraq, since 
it is obvious that Saddam had nothing to do with the WTC 
attack of 9/11? To drive the world to 'doomsday' by 
starting World War III? 

It doesn't make any sense that anyone but a fringe 
nutcase would believe this, but it looks like a few 
FFL informants really do believe in doomsday scenarios. 

Go figure.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 911 Towers had several explosions -- new video footage reveals.

[Vaj]

On Jun 9, 2011, at 12:14 PM, Duveyoung wrote:


Bhairitu wrote:

"Now Edg, you know on FFL you've got to connect that somehow to  
whether  the world is going to end and FFL'ers didn't even make it  
to CC.   Obviously looking at the hot topics here that's whats  
really important,  not the biggest bank heist in the history of the  
world.  Or that this  summer is going to be a riot. ;-)"



Okay, how about, "the Maharishi Effect didn't prevent it" as the  
conversational nexus?


Or, "Those firemen were probably so stressed up from the experience  
that virtually all their elephants were deeply sleeping and needing  
much rest to heal, so therefore these firemen were speaking  
straight from pure being in that no elephant was stomping around  
producing non-natural thoughts; therefore: their testimony is  
indisputable."


Or, "Did anyone notice that Turq was conveniently out of the  
country when it all happened?"


Or, "Where's all this extra extra powerful force that Maharishi was  
supposed to become after he shed the body which was taking up so  
much of his mojo?  Shouldn't he have reversed time by now?"


Or, "If you play this video backwards, one can clearly hear "The  
Beatles did it in revenge against Sexy Sadie."


Need more?


Nah, it was probably just the result of a Necronomicon-based  
interdimensional portal opening up, creating a wormhole between our  
world and that of the Ancient Ones.


I'm pretty sure I saw a video where the tentacles of Cthulu could  
clearly be seen. Of course all the news outlets refused to play that  
particular angle.

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 Towers had several explosions -- new video footage reveals.

[Duveyoung]

Bhairitu wrote:

"Now Edg, you know on FFL you've got to connect that somehow to whether  the 
world is going to end and FFL'ers didn't even make it to CC.   Obviously 
looking at the hot topics here that's whats really important,  not the biggest 
bank heist in the history of the world.  Or that this  summer is going to be a 
riot. ;-)"


Okay, how about, "the Maharishi Effect didn't prevent it" as the conversational 
nexus?

Or, "Those firemen were probably so stressed up from the experience that 
virtually all their elephants were deeply sleeping and needing much rest to 
heal, so therefore these firemen were speaking straight from pure being in that 
no elephant was stomping around producing non-natural thoughts; therefore: 
their testimony is indisputable."

Or, "Did anyone notice that Turq was conveniently out of the country when it 
all happened?"

Or, "Where's all this extra extra powerful force that Maharishi was supposed to 
become after he shed the body which was taking up so much of his mojo?  
Shouldn't he have reversed time by now?"  

Or, "If you play this video backwards, one can clearly hear "The Beatles did it 
in revenge against Sexy Sadie."

Need more?

Edg

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 .......

[brian64705]

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20100412/NEWS03/4120315/Hansen-Official-9-11-story-is-hooey-critic-maintains

Hansen: Official 9/11 story is hooey, critic maintains 
BY MARC HANSEN • mahan...@dmreg.com • APRIL 12, 2010
 
David Ray Griffin comes to Drake University on April 23 to tell us why the 
official explanation for the 9/11 attack on the United States doesn't hold 
water.

A theologian, philosopher of religion and professor emeritus at California's 
Claremont School of Theology and Claremont Graduate University, Griffin has 
been at it for about seven years now and says he won't stop until the 
government conducts a new, impartial, independent investigation. 
> --- On Wed, 4/21/10, Rick Archer  wrote:
> 
> 
> From: Rick Archer 
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] 911 ...
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Wednesday, April 21, 2010, 4:11 PM
> 
> 
>   
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://bluesplayer. co.uk/youtube_ animation/ video/daNr_ TrBw6E/General- 
> of-all-American- Intelligence- 911-was-a- fraud.html
>  
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 .......

[curtisdeltablues]

Excellent find Rick.  Now I find it easy to believe that this guy walks into 
walls so often that when he gets to a doorway he considers it a sidhi when he 
makes it through!






--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
>
> http://bluesplayer.co.uk/youtube_animation/video/daNr_TrBw6E/General-of-all-
> American-Intelligence-911-was-a-fraud.html
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 conspiracy films

[off_world_beings]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> bob_brigante wrote:
> > "But the most annoying thing about the movies—and the
Truthers—is that
> > the actual truth, in all its awful complexity, isn't enough for
them.
> > No matter that 3,000 Americans died because of bungling and
blowback,
> > or that the Bush administration twisted their deaths into pretexts
for
> > unnecessary war and executive power run amok. The Truthers want
more.
> > They've missed the real lesson of the Bush administration, which is
not
> > that a secretive cabal runs the White House, but that its diabolic
> > intent has been trumped by its staggering incompetence. Seven years
on,
> > the neocon notion that imperial power can reshape reality has been
> > fully exposed as a fantasy. Yet the Truthers cling to the myth of
> > official omnipotence, making them some of the last Americans who
still
> > believe that this administration could successfully pull off
anything
> > bigger than T-ball on the South Lawn.
> >
> > http://tinyurl.com/63fe9z
> >
> > from:
> > http://www.motherjones.com//arts/feature/2008/09/media-jones
> > -the-truth-is-out-there.html
> What this shows is how little the writer knows about the 9-11 truth
> movement. There are numerous theories about who was really behind 9-11
> not just one. There are all kinds of gaps and flaws in the "official
> version" of 9-11. The latest video in the 9-11 truth movement is
"Fabled
> Enemies" which is presented more like an attorney giving a final
> summation to a journey and you can draw your own conclusions. It *is*
> pretty clear that the Bush administration was given advance warning of
> an attack and why they chose to ignore it is a mystery (unless they
> wanted to use it to their advantage). >>

And then add to that afore-knowledge that Cheney ordered any fighter
planes in the vicinity to stay on the ground. This is against protocol
for such an attack. Period.

< attacks used as a pretext to armed conflict. >>

Yes, including the Vietnam war, according to recently declassified
government documents.

< be any different? In fact you might just look at the recent "false
flag"
> attacks by Georgia on Ossetia for starters.>>

Especially when there is a lot of money to be made. Some people are so
naive to think that no-one could do this, but its been done before in
recent history, and there are people in the world so calous that they
could plan and do it to their own people.

And what about the Anthrax attack. That was not done by that guy that
"committed suicide" , and the investigation has been deliberately
unsuccessful. What about the British scientist who was crucial to this
whole affair and had evidence that someone didn't want to come out,
"committing suicide" in a way that no-one commits suicide and is
virtually impossibe.

What about the high end call girls who were about to spill the beans  on
a bunch of Washington insiders who also "committed suicide" after
stating emphatically that they would not commit suicide, (when asked
because of previous incidents)



> What I would like to know is why you would chose to believe that 19
Arab
> terrorists armed with all things just box cutters could have been
> responsible for 9-11? >

And how come at least 6 of the 'hikackers' are alive and well and living
and working as ordinary people in the middle east and have never had any
connection to any criminal activity?

 passengers took down flight 93 when during the recent terrorist court
> case the military prosecutor said the flight was shot down? Rumsfield
> made numerous slips to the press saying it was shot down. They lie too
> us. They lied to us about WMDs. They lied to us about Iraq. How can
you
> believe on 9-11?
>
> But then some people believe the marketing bullshit of the TMO.>

I only believe in peer-reviewed research published in respected
scientific journals of which TM has more than any other technique,
pharmaceutical medicine, or anythingby far. Nothing else under the
sun comes remotely close, and the NIH have given 20 million in research
funding because of this, and TM is a recmmended rehabilitation technique
by the state of Missouri, and Dr. Lybimov, hugely respected
nueroscientist of Russia was astounded by the EEG patterns. In addition,
modern physics comes to the same conclusions that Maharishi expounded
about the reality of existence.

But hey, some joker with a bachelors degree in biology says different,
so you believe him over all the real experts.

OffWorld


>
> Fabled Enemies:
> http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2144933190875239407
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 conspiracy films

[off_world_beings]

Maybe, but can anyone here explain how one of the hijackers that went
with the plane into that massive ball of flame on hitting one of the
towers, from which NOTHING was recovered of the aicraft, somehow,
dropped his passport in that ball of flame, the passport wisked itself
out of there, dropped to the ground and was picked up on hood of a car
on the ground amongst the endless dust, completely unscorched or damaged
in any way, by a policemen. Then the CIA post this finding of the
passport as further proof of their claim of who the hijackers were.
This alone is beyond belief, but I suppose by some miracle the
hijacker's passport could have landed there, in perfect condition, as
the ONLY thing that survived the explosion and massive ball of fire
(yeah rightno chance).

BUT, then it is discovered that this hijacker is alive and well and
working as a pilot or something in the middle east. He was not there.

Can someone here please give me a rational explanation for these known
facts?

OffWorld

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 , bob_brigante <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> "But the most annoying thing about the movies—and the
Truthers—is that
> the actual truth, in all its awful complexity, isn't enough for them.
> No matter that 3,000 Americans died because of bungling and blowback,
> or that the Bush administration twisted their deaths into pretexts for
> unnecessary war and executive power run amok. The Truthers want more.
> They've missed the real lesson of the Bush administration, which is
not
> that a secretive cabal runs the White House, but that its diabolic
> intent has been trumped by its staggering incompetence. Seven years
on,
> the neocon notion that imperial power can reshape reality has been
> fully exposed as a fantasy. Yet the Truthers cling to the myth of
> official omnipotence, making them some of the last Americans who still
> believe that this administration could successfully pull off anything
> bigger than T-ball on the South Lawn.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/63fe9z 
>
> from:
> http://www.motherjones.com//arts/feature/2008/09/media-jones

> -the-truth-is-out-there.html
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[Bhairitu]

Plus there is some absurdity in suggesting that BushCo is incompetent 
and Al-Qaeda is competent which flies against what most intelligence 
agents have to say about that group.  :)

Angela Mailander wrote:
> Moreover, the thing HAS been exposed.  The rest of the
> world is not as blind as we seem to be at home.  There
> was a big international 9/11 truth convention a couple
> of weeks ago in Australia, for instance.  It was
> sponsored and hosted by a Japanese member of
> Parliament.  
>
>
> --- Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>   
>> authfriend wrote:
>> 
>>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu
>>>   
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> 
>>>   
>>>   
 Most people don't want to believe that 9-11 was
 
>> done by a
>> 
 rogue US faction because they don't want to
 
>> believe that
>> 
 anyone could be that evil.  But then we don't
 
>> even need to
>> 
 look at 9-11 to see how evil our rogue government
 
>> is do we?
>> 
 
 
>>> Thing is, what's become obvious is that our rogue
>>> government is not only evil but *incompetent*.
>>>   
>> Even
>> 
>>> if there weren't oogobs of evidence against their
>>> having done 9/11, there's no way they could have
>>> pulled it off successfully and not had it
>>>   
>> thoroughly
>> 
>>> exposed by now.
>>>   
>> You're making the mistake that many who bash 9-11
>> conspiracy theorist 
>> make and that is that we are saying the Bush
>> administration did it.  Yup 
>> they are too incompetent to pull something like that
>> off.  We're talking 
>> about another rogue faction though not so obvious
>> but very influential.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>
>
> Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com 
>
>   

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[Duveyoung]

One of the most difficult to deny anti-conspiracy theory facts is that
Russia (or any state wanting to embarrass America) has not come out
with anything to expose the USA.

I'm thinking that they've got enough mojo to have looked into the 9-11
issues using spy sources and that they would have ratted out the whole
scam if they could have.

So, it didn't happen, and to me, that means that the whole operation
was done by a very small number of people maybe, or that it is what it
was portrayed to be.

Anyone got a good counter to this "Russians wudda exposed it" concept?

Edg

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander 
>  wrote:
> >
> > Moreover, the thing HAS been exposed.  The rest of the
> > world is not as blind as we seem to be at home.  There
> > was a big international 9/11 truth convention a couple
> > of weeks ago in Australia, for instance.  It was
> > sponsored and hosted by a Japanese member of
> > Parliament.
> 
> Oh, please, Angela. It doesn't matter how many
> "international conventions" there are if they
> can't come up with any hard evidence and can't
> *rebut* the great deal of hard evidence there is
> *against* their theories.
> 
> (Again, I make a distinction between the theory
> that they knew in advance, which I think is
> plausible, and the controlled-demolition and
> missile-at-the-Pentagon theories, which are not
> even remotely plausible.)
> 
> Conventions don't prove theories. *Evidence*
> proves theories. It also *disproves* theories.
> 
> And when you get to the point of suggesting that
> all the videos from public sources have been
> Photoshopped to make the debris appear to fall
> faster than the towers, you just lose all
> credibility.
> 
> > --- Bhairitu  wrote:
> > 
> > > authfriend wrote:
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu
> > >  wrote:
> > > >   
> > > >> Most people don't want to believe that 9-11 was
> > > >> done by a rogue US faction because they don't want
> > > >> to believe that anyone could be that evil.  But
> > > >> then we don't even need to look at 9-11 to see how
> > > >> evil our rogue government is do we?
> > > >
> > > > Thing is, what's become obvious is that our rogue
> > > > government is not only evil but *incompetent*.
> > > > Even if there weren't oogobs of evidence against their
> > > > having done 9/11, there's no way they could have
> > > > pulled it off successfully and not had it thoroughly
> > > > exposed by now.
> > > >
> > > You're making the mistake that many who bash 9-11
> > > conspiracy theorist make and that is that we are
> > > saying the Bush administration did it.  Yup they
> > > are too incompetent to pull something like that
> > > off.  We're talking about another rogue faction
> > > though not so obvious but very influential.
> 
> Aside from the extreme implausibility of such a thing,
> you just stepped on your earlier point as well.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It's lots better than it used to be about people
> actually willing to hear the truth.

But they *aren't* hearing the truth, Angela. They're
hearing paranoid nonsense.

  As they gain
> power, they also acquire more and more visibility--in
> that regard, 9/11 has actually had some benefit.  Judy
> read through those points I sent, but that isn't the
> same as actually following up on each point and
> looking at the whole story behind it.

I've looked in great detail at the "whole story" behind
the controlled-demolition theory. I'd be willing to bet
a large sum that I've looked more closely at those claims
and the stories behind them than you have looked at the
evidence rebutting them.

  That would take
> some time, but, more importantly, some willingness to
> entertain the idea.  No one ever finds a truth without
> the willingness to suspend disbelief.

I was all too willing to believe the Bushies did it at
first. Then I looked at the evidence pro and con and
realized it wasn't plausible.

> This doesn't
> mean you swallow everything you're given, of course.

Such as your Photoshopping theory, for instance?

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Moreover, the thing HAS been exposed.  The rest of the
> world is not as blind as we seem to be at home.  There
> was a big international 9/11 truth convention a couple
> of weeks ago in Australia, for instance.  It was
> sponsored and hosted by a Japanese member of
> Parliament.

Oh, please, Angela. It doesn't matter how many
"international conventions" there are if they
can't come up with any hard evidence and can't
*rebut* the great deal of hard evidence there is
*against* their theories.

(Again, I make a distinction between the theory
that they knew in advance, which I think is
plausible, and the controlled-demolition and
missile-at-the-Pentagon theories, which are not
even remotely plausible.)

Conventions don't prove theories. *Evidence*
proves theories. It also *disproves* theories.

And when you get to the point of suggesting that
all the videos from public sources have been
Photoshopped to make the debris appear to fall
faster than the towers, you just lose all
credibility.

> --- Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > authfriend wrote:
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu
> >  wrote:
> > >   
> > >> Most people don't want to believe that 9-11 was
> > >> done by a rogue US faction because they don't want
> > >> to believe that anyone could be that evil.  But
> > >> then we don't even need to look at 9-11 to see how
> > >> evil our rogue government is do we?
> > >
> > > Thing is, what's become obvious is that our rogue
> > > government is not only evil but *incompetent*.
> > > Even if there weren't oogobs of evidence against their
> > > having done 9/11, there's no way they could have
> > > pulled it off successfully and not had it thoroughly
> > > exposed by now.
> > >
> > You're making the mistake that many who bash 9-11
> > conspiracy theorist make and that is that we are
> > saying the Bush administration did it.  Yup they
> > are too incompetent to pull something like that
> > off.  We're talking about another rogue faction
> > though not so obvious but very influential.

Aside from the extreme implausibility of such a thing,
you just stepped on your earlier point as well.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[Angela Mailander]

It's lots better than it used to be about people
actually willing to hear the truth.  As they gain
power, they also acquire more and more visibility--in
that regard, 9/11 has actually had some benefit.  Judy
read through those points I sent, but that isn't the
same as actually following up on each point and
looking at the whole story behind it.  That would take
some time, but, more importantly, some willingness to
entertain the idea.  No one ever finds a truth without
the willingness to suspend disbelief.  This doesn't
mean you swallow everything you're given, of course.  


--- Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Most people don't want to believe that 9-11 was done
> by a rogue US 
> faction because they don't want to believe that
> anyone could be that 
> evil.  But then we don't even need to look at 9-11
> to see how evil our 
> rogue government is do we?  :)
> 
> 
> Angela Mailander wrote:
> > Coherence is in the eyes of the beholder.  
> > But I'm not going to argue this with you Judy,
> since
> > the last time we talked, it was plain that you are
> > more interested in trading insults than actually
> > having a conversation.  Trading insults with you
> was
> > amusing that one week some time back when I went
> for
> > asshole of the week, but it is not something I
> want to
> > do on a regular basis. 
> >
> >
> >
> > --- authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >   
> >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela
> >> Mailander 
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> 
> >>> All of them together are suspicious.
> >>>   
> >> "All of them together" aren't even coherent,
> Angela.
> >> Many of them are easily refutable.
> >>
> >> Some of the ones that seem to suggest
> foreknowledge
> >> look credible to me. But many of those, if
> they're
> >> accurate, refute the "controlled demolition"
> notion
> >> because they suggest the foreknowledge was of the
> >> hijackings and attacks by air. If everything was
> >> so carefully planned to demolish the buildings
> right
> >> after the attacks, they'd have had to know which
> >> planes were going to be hijacked, and they
> wouldn't
> >> have had to cancel their own flights--just for
> one
> >> point.
> >>
> >>   As for the
> >> 
> >>> videos you see in the mainstream media, do you
> >>>   
> >> think
> >> 
> >>> you can trust them?
> >>>   
> >> Ah, so every bit of video of the collapses that's
> >> been available from public sources has been
> >> carefully retouched to show debris falling faster
> >> than the towers, so perfectly that nobody has
> >> been able to expose it?
> >>
> >>   Have you seen the video recently
> >> 
> >>> released which a private individual took who
> >>>   
> >> happened
> >> 
> >>> to be on a high up floor with a plain view of
> the
> >>> towers?  I'll try to find the link if you're
> >>> interested, but I doubt that you're really
> >>>   
> >> interested.
> >>
> >> No, I'd be delighted to have a look.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 
> >
> >
> > Send instant messages to your online friends
> http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com 
> >
> >   
> 
> 


Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[Angela Mailander]

Moreover, the thing HAS been exposed.  The rest of the
world is not as blind as we seem to be at home.  There
was a big international 9/11 truth convention a couple
of weeks ago in Australia, for instance.  It was
sponsored and hosted by a Japanese member of
Parliament.  


--- Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> authfriend wrote:
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >   
> >> Most people don't want to believe that 9-11 was
> done by a
> >> rogue US faction because they don't want to
> believe that
> >> anyone could be that evil.  But then we don't
> even need to
> >> look at 9-11 to see how evil our rogue government
> is do we?
> >> 
> >
> > Thing is, what's become obvious is that our rogue
> > government is not only evil but *incompetent*.
> Even
> > if there weren't oogobs of evidence against their
> > having done 9/11, there's no way they could have
> > pulled it off successfully and not had it
> thoroughly
> > exposed by now.
> You're making the mistake that many who bash 9-11
> conspiracy theorist 
> make and that is that we are saying the Bush
> administration did it.  Yup 
> they are too incompetent to pull something like that
> off.  We're talking 
> about another rogue faction though not so obvious
> but very influential.
> 
> 
> 
> 


Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[Bhairitu]

authfriend wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>   
>> Most people don't want to believe that 9-11 was done by a
>> rogue US faction because they don't want to believe that
>> anyone could be that evil.  But then we don't even need to
>> look at 9-11 to see how evil our rogue government is do we?
>> 
>
> Thing is, what's become obvious is that our rogue
> government is not only evil but *incompetent*. Even
> if there weren't oogobs of evidence against their
> having done 9/11, there's no way they could have
> pulled it off successfully and not had it thoroughly
> exposed by now.
You're making the mistake that many who bash 9-11 conspiracy theorist 
make and that is that we are saying the Bush administration did it.  Yup 
they are too incompetent to pull something like that off.  We're talking 
about another rogue faction though not so obvious but very influential.

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Most people don't want to believe that 9-11 was done by a
> rogue US faction because they don't want to believe that
> anyone could be that evil.  But then we don't even need to
> look at 9-11 to see how evil our rogue government is do we?

Thing is, what's become obvious is that our rogue
government is not only evil but *incompetent*. Even
if there weren't oogobs of evidence against their
having done 9/11, there's no way they could have
pulled it off successfully and not had it thoroughly
exposed by now.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[Bhairitu]

Most people don't want to believe that 9-11 was done by a rogue US 
faction because they don't want to believe that anyone could be that 
evil.  But then we don't even need to look at 9-11 to see how evil our 
rogue government is do we?  :)


Angela Mailander wrote:
> Coherence is in the eyes of the beholder.  
> But I'm not going to argue this with you Judy, since
> the last time we talked, it was plain that you are
> more interested in trading insults than actually
> having a conversation.  Trading insults with you was
> amusing that one week some time back when I went for
> asshole of the week, but it is not something I want to
> do on a regular basis. 
>
>
>
> --- authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>   
>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela
>> Mailander 
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> 
>>> All of them together are suspicious.
>>>   
>> "All of them together" aren't even coherent, Angela.
>> Many of them are easily refutable.
>>
>> Some of the ones that seem to suggest foreknowledge
>> look credible to me. But many of those, if they're
>> accurate, refute the "controlled demolition" notion
>> because they suggest the foreknowledge was of the
>> hijackings and attacks by air. If everything was
>> so carefully planned to demolish the buildings right
>> after the attacks, they'd have had to know which
>> planes were going to be hijacked, and they wouldn't
>> have had to cancel their own flights--just for one
>> point.
>>
>>   As for the
>> 
>>> videos you see in the mainstream media, do you
>>>   
>> think
>> 
>>> you can trust them?
>>>   
>> Ah, so every bit of video of the collapses that's
>> been available from public sources has been
>> carefully retouched to show debris falling faster
>> than the towers, so perfectly that nobody has
>> been able to expose it?
>>
>>   Have you seen the video recently
>> 
>>> released which a private individual took who
>>>   
>> happened
>> 
>>> to be on a high up floor with a plain view of the
>>> towers?  I'll try to find the link if you're
>>> interested, but I doubt that you're really
>>>   
>> interested.
>>
>> No, I'd be delighted to have a look.
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>
>
> Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com 
>
>   

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[Bhairitu]

The Onion video makes fun of Al-Qaeda in that video not so much of the 
9-11 conspiracies.  I thought it was funny too.


Patrick Gillam wrote:
> I haven't really followed the 9/11 conspiracy debate. I simply 
> posted that Onion video link because I found it to be funny. 
> I guess my amusement betrays my leanings on the issue, 
> though, doesn't it?
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>   
>> Patrick,
>>
>> Did you see that article "Former Governor Jesse Ventura: WTC Collapse
>> A Controlled Demolition" at http://tinyurl.com/33arqq ?
>>
>> More and more celebrities are putting their public image behind this
>> issue. Too bad Jesse was an actor/wrestler first -- if a lifelong
>> politician came out with this stance, there'd be more clout to it.
>>
>> If only a true smoking-gun was available that the masses could be told
>> of in a ten second sound bite.
>>
>> Like:  
>>
>> --Whistleblowers who document how they installed explosive charges
>> into the buildings before 9-11, and now they feel so guilty.  We know
>> the buildings' were emptied or partially emptied for days at a time
>> when "inspectors" were "working on the buildings."  Like that.
>>
>> --New videos taken by by-standers could show a rocket entering the
>> Pentagon, small explosions at the base of Building 7, etc.
>>
>> --The "let's roll" guy shows up suntanned on a beach in Mexico.
>>
>> --Some kid could have secretly cell-phone recorded/taped Bush
>> listening to that guy who whispers in his ear, and we hear that guy
>> say, "It's been done, the second tower has been hit, and the Pentagon
>> is next."
>>
>> --Bush has a stroke and in his ensuing confused state he blurts out
>> 9-11 secrets to 30 emergency room staffers.
>>
>> --The NEXT bombing is done to insure McCain gets elected, and they
>> botch the deal so much that the truth is easily seen in the first TV
>> reports at the scene(s) of carnage.  
>>
>> --The BBC reporter documents how come they KNEW Building 7 was down 30
>> minutes before it came down.
>>
>> --Aliens from outer space arrive and say that they're so disgusted
>> with the vile acts that they have announced themselves 2,000 years
>> earlier than they had planned to do so in order to expose the evil
>> behind 9-11.  I'm just trying to have a complete list, see?
>>
>> Edg
>>
>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Gillam" 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Have 9/11 conspiracy debaters seen this bit from The Onion?
>>>
>>> 9/11 Conspiracy Theories 'Ridiculous,' Al Qaeda Says
>>>
>>> www.theonion.com/content/video/9_11_conspiracy_theories
>>>   
>
>
>
>
>   

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[Patrick Gillam]

I haven't really followed the 9/11 conspiracy debate. I simply 
posted that Onion video link because I found it to be funny. 
I guess my amusement betrays my leanings on the issue, 
though, doesn't it?

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Patrick,
> 
> Did you see that article "Former Governor Jesse Ventura: WTC Collapse
> A Controlled Demolition" at http://tinyurl.com/33arqq ?
> 
> More and more celebrities are putting their public image behind this
> issue. Too bad Jesse was an actor/wrestler first -- if a lifelong
> politician came out with this stance, there'd be more clout to it.
> 
> If only a true smoking-gun was available that the masses could be told
> of in a ten second sound bite.
> 
> Like:  
> 
> --Whistleblowers who document how they installed explosive charges
> into the buildings before 9-11, and now they feel so guilty.  We know
> the buildings' were emptied or partially emptied for days at a time
> when "inspectors" were "working on the buildings."  Like that.
> 
> --New videos taken by by-standers could show a rocket entering the
> Pentagon, small explosions at the base of Building 7, etc.
> 
> --The "let's roll" guy shows up suntanned on a beach in Mexico.
> 
> --Some kid could have secretly cell-phone recorded/taped Bush
> listening to that guy who whispers in his ear, and we hear that guy
> say, "It's been done, the second tower has been hit, and the Pentagon
> is next."
> 
> --Bush has a stroke and in his ensuing confused state he blurts out
> 9-11 secrets to 30 emergency room staffers.
> 
> --The NEXT bombing is done to insure McCain gets elected, and they
> botch the deal so much that the truth is easily seen in the first TV
> reports at the scene(s) of carnage.  
> 
> --The BBC reporter documents how come they KNEW Building 7 was down 30
> minutes before it came down.
> 
> --Aliens from outer space arrive and say that they're so disgusted
> with the vile acts that they have announced themselves 2,000 years
> earlier than they had planned to do so in order to expose the evil
> behind 9-11.  I'm just trying to have a complete list, see?
> 
> Edg
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Gillam" 
> wrote:
> >
> > Have 9/11 conspiracy debaters seen this bit from The Onion?
> > 
> > 9/11 Conspiracy Theories 'Ridiculous,' Al Qaeda Says
> > 
> > www.theonion.com/content/video/9_11_conspiracy_theories

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Coherence is in the eyes of the beholder.  
> But I'm not going to argue this with you Judy

Of course you aren't, Angela. You can't.

, since
> the last time we talked, it was plain that you are
> more interested in trading insults than actually
> having a conversation.

Your memory is playing you tricks again, Angela.
Makes a good excuse for not having a discussion
about facts, though, don't it?

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[Angela Mailander]

Coherence is in the eyes of the beholder.  
But I'm not going to argue this with you Judy, since
the last time we talked, it was plain that you are
more interested in trading insults than actually
having a conversation.  Trading insults with you was
amusing that one week some time back when I went for
asshole of the week, but it is not something I want to
do on a regular basis. 



--- authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela
> Mailander 
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > All of them together are suspicious.
> 
> "All of them together" aren't even coherent, Angela.
> Many of them are easily refutable.
> 
> Some of the ones that seem to suggest foreknowledge
> look credible to me. But many of those, if they're
> accurate, refute the "controlled demolition" notion
> because they suggest the foreknowledge was of the
> hijackings and attacks by air. If everything was
> so carefully planned to demolish the buildings right
> after the attacks, they'd have had to know which
> planes were going to be hijacked, and they wouldn't
> have had to cancel their own flights--just for one
> point.
> 
>   As for the
> > videos you see in the mainstream media, do you
> think
> > you can trust them?
> 
> Ah, so every bit of video of the collapses that's
> been available from public sources has been
> carefully retouched to show debris falling faster
> than the towers, so perfectly that nobody has
> been able to expose it?
> 
>   Have you seen the video recently
> > released which a private individual took who
> happened
> > to be on a high up floor with a plain view of the
> > towers?  I'll try to find the link if you're
> > interested, but I doubt that you're really
> interested.
> 
> No, I'd be delighted to have a look.
> 
> 
> 


Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com 

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> All of them together are suspicious.

"All of them together" aren't even coherent, Angela.
Many of them are easily refutable.

Some of the ones that seem to suggest foreknowledge
look credible to me. But many of those, if they're
accurate, refute the "controlled demolition" notion
because they suggest the foreknowledge was of the
hijackings and attacks by air. If everything was
so carefully planned to demolish the buildings right
after the attacks, they'd have had to know which
planes were going to be hijacked, and they wouldn't
have had to cancel their own flights--just for one
point.

  As for the
> videos you see in the mainstream media, do you think
> you can trust them?

Ah, so every bit of video of the collapses that's
been available from public sources has been
carefully retouched to show debris falling faster
than the towers, so perfectly that nobody has
been able to expose it?

  Have you seen the video recently
> released which a private individual took who happened
> to be on a high up floor with a plain view of the
> towers?  I'll try to find the link if you're
> interested, but I doubt that you're really interested.

No, I'd be delighted to have a look.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[Angela Mailander]

All of them together are suspicious.  As for the
videos you see in the mainstream media, do you think
you can trust them?  Have you seen the video recently
released which a private individual took who happened
to be on a high up floor with a plain view of the
towers?  I'll try to find the link if you're
interested, but I doubt that you're really interested.
 



--- authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela
> Mailander 
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Buildings falling at free-fall speed IS a smoking
> gun,
> > Edg.
> 
> "In every photo and every video, you can see columns
> far
> outpacing the collapse of the building. Not only are
> the
> columns falling faster than the building but they
> are
> also falling faster than the debris cloud which is
> ALSO
> falling faster than the building. This proves the
> buildings fell well below free fall speed. That is,
> unless the beams had a rocket pointed to the ground.
> 
> "Just look at any video you like and watch the
> perimeter
> columns.
> 
> "Deceptive videos stop the timer of the fall at
> 10:09 when
> only the perimeter column hits the ground and not
> the
> building itself. If you notice, the building just
> finishes 
> disappearing behind the debris cloud which is still
> about
> 40 stories high."
> 
> Read more at:
> http://www.debunking911.com/freefall.htm
> 
> Also see:
> 
> http://www.911myths.com/html/freefall.html
> 
> 
> > Below I'm pasting some of the 250+ "smoking guns."
> 
> > Unfortunately, I don't have the whole document
> > available.
> 
> Not one of these is even *remotely* a "smoking gun"
> with regard to the "controlled demolition" theory.
> 
> 
> 


Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com 

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Buildings falling at free-fall speed IS a smoking gun,
> Edg.

"In every photo and every video, you can see columns far
outpacing the collapse of the building. Not only are the
columns falling faster than the building but they are
also falling faster than the debris cloud which is ALSO
falling faster than the building. This proves the
buildings fell well below free fall speed. That is,
unless the beams had a rocket pointed to the ground.

"Just look at any video you like and watch the perimeter
columns.

"Deceptive videos stop the timer of the fall at 10:09 when
only the perimeter column hits the ground and not the
building itself. If you notice, the building just finishes 
disappearing behind the debris cloud which is still about
40 stories high."

Read more at:
http://www.debunking911.com/freefall.htm

Also see:

http://www.911myths.com/html/freefall.html


> Below I'm pasting some of the 250+ "smoking guns." 
> Unfortunately, I don't have the whole document
> available.

Not one of these is even *remotely* a "smoking gun"
with regard to the "controlled demolition" theory.

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[Duveyoung]

Patrick,

Did you see that article "Former Governor Jesse Ventura: WTC Collapse
A Controlled Demolition" at http://tinyurl.com/33arqq ?

More and more celebrities are putting their public image behind this
issue. Too bad Jesse was an actor/wrestler first -- if a lifelong
politician came out with this stance, there'd be more clout to it.

If only a true smoking-gun was available that the masses could be told
of in a ten second sound bite.

Like:  

--Whistleblowers who document how they installed explosive charges
into the buildings before 9-11, and now they feel so guilty.  We know
the buildings' were emptied or partially emptied for days at a time
when "inspectors" were "working on the buildings."  Like that.

--New videos taken by by-standers could show a rocket entering the
Pentagon, small explosions at the base of Building 7, etc.

--The "let's roll" guy shows up suntanned on a beach in Mexico.

--Some kid could have secretly cell-phone recorded/taped Bush
listening to that guy who whispers in his ear, and we hear that guy
say, "It's been done, the second tower has been hit, and the Pentagon
is next."

--Bush has a stroke and in his ensuing confused state he blurts out
9-11 secrets to 30 emergency room staffers.

--The NEXT bombing is done to insure McCain gets elected, and they
botch the deal so much that the truth is easily seen in the first TV
reports at the scene(s) of carnage.  

--The BBC reporter documents how come they KNEW Building 7 was down 30
minutes before it came down.

--Aliens from outer space arrive and say that they're so disgusted
with the vile acts that they have announced themselves 2,000 years
earlier than they had planned to do so in order to expose the evil
behind 9-11.  I'm just trying to have a complete list, see?

Edg

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Gillam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> Have 9/11 conspiracy debaters seen this bit from The Onion?
> 
> 9/11 Conspiracy Theories 'Ridiculous,' Al Qaeda Says
> 
> www.theonion.com/content/video/9_11_conspiracy_theories
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander
 wrote:
> >
> > Try to remember that "you sound really scared" is not a logical
argument or statement 
> worthy of repeating.  
> > Are we looking for the truth or are we only interested in
defending our own point of 
> view?  
> > If we are looking for the truth, then alternative points of view
have to be considered with 
> more willingness of suspension of disbelief on all sides.  
> > 
> > 
> > - Original Message 
> > From: Richard J. Williams 
> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 11:49:56 AM
> > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go  (of the
assailing on FFL)
> > 
> > 
> > Ruth wrote:
> > 
> > > > People cannot accept that a few terrorists could cause 
> > 
> > > > such a disaster of such proportion in the United States.
> > 
> > > >
> > 
> > Bharat2 wrote:
> > 
> > > Don't forget that the "official" version is also a "conspiracy 
> > 
> > > theory" and admitted to be so by its authors.
> > 
> > >
> > 
> > And don't forget that your entire political philosophy is based
> > 
> > on a 'vast right-wing conspiracy' against Bharat2! You sound
> > 
> > really scared.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[Patrick Gillam]

Have 9/11 conspiracy debaters seen this bit from The Onion?

9/11 Conspiracy Theories 'Ridiculous,' Al Qaeda Says

www.theonion.com/content/video/9_11_conspiracy_theories


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> Try to remember that "you sound really scared" is not a logical argument or 
> statement 
worthy of repeating.  
> Are we looking for the truth or are we only interested in defending our own 
> point of 
view?  
> If we are looking for the truth, then alternative points of view have to be 
> considered with 
more willingness of suspension of disbelief on all sides.  
> 
> 
> - Original Message 
> From: Richard J. Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 11:49:56 AM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go  (of the assailing 
> on FFL)
> 
> 
> Ruth wrote:
> 
> > > People cannot accept that a few terrorists could cause 
> 
> > > such a disaster of such proportion in the United States.
> 
> > >
> 
> Bharat2 wrote:
> 
> > Don't forget that the "official" version is also a "conspiracy 
> 
> > theory" and admitted to be so by its authors.
> 
> >
> 
> And don't forget that your entire political philosophy is based
> 
> on a 'vast right-wing conspiracy' against Bharat2! You sound
> 
> really scared. 

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> That's after you discredited yourself by continuous ad hominem 
attacks, nor am I the only person on this board to have noticed your 
attitude towards me.



Sorry, but you weren't addressing me in that
quote. It was in response to somebody else who
was schooling you concerning the collapse of
the towers.

(But even if it had been me, is gross hypocrisy
a suitable response to ad hominem?)

> Nevertheless, I claim the asshole championship of this list.

Just so we're all clear.


> From: authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, Angela Mailander 
>  wrote:
> 
> > Are we looking for the truth or are we only interested in
> > defending our own point of view? If we are looking for the
> > truth, then alternative points of view have to be considered
> > with more willingness of suspension of disbelief on all sides.
> 
> "But I do not care what you believe, nor do I really want to
> argue with you about this.  You will not change your mind,
> and I will not change mine."
> 
> --Angela Mailander, January 16

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[Angela Mailander]

That's after you discredited yourself by continuous ad hominem attacks, nor am 
I the only person on this board to have noticed your attitude towards me.  
Nevertheless, I claim the asshole championship of this list.

- Original Message 
From: authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2008 1:05:34 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go  (of the assailing on 
FFL)









  



--- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, Angela Mailander 

 wrote:



> Are we looking for the truth or are we only interested in

> defending our own point of view? If we are looking for the

> truth, then alternative points of view have to be considered

> with more willingness of suspension of disbelief on all sides.



"But I do not care what you believe, nor do I really want to

argue with you about this.  You will not change your mind,

and I will not change mine."



--Angela Mailander, January 16






  























Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com 

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Are we looking for the truth or are we only interested in
> defending our own point of view? If we are looking for the
> truth, then alternative points of view have to be considered
> with more willingness of suspension of disbelief on all sides.

"But I do not care what you believe, nor do I really want to
argue with you about this.  You will not change your mind,
and I will not change mine."

--Angela Mailander, January 16

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[Angela Mailander]

Try to remember that "you sound really scared" is not a logical argument or 
statement worthy of repeating.  
Are we looking for the truth or are we only interested in defending our own 
point of view?  
If we are looking for the truth, then alternative points of view have to be 
considered with more willingness of suspension of disbelief on all sides.  


- Original Message 
From: Richard J. Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 11:49:56 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go  (of the assailing on 
FFL)









  



Ruth wrote:

> > People cannot accept that a few terrorists could cause 

> > such a disaster of such proportion in the United States.

> >

Bharat2 wrote:

> Don't forget that the "official" version is also a "conspiracy 

> theory" and admitted to be so by its authors.

>

And don't forget that your entire political philosophy is based

on a 'vast right-wing conspiracy' against Bharat2! You sound

really scared. 






  























Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com 

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[Richard J. Williams]

Ruth wrote:
> > People cannot accept that a few terrorists could cause 
> > such a disaster of such proportion in the United States.
> >
Bharat2 wrote:
> Don't forget that the "official" version is also a "conspiracy 
> theory" and admitted to be so by its authors.
>
And don't forget that your entire political philosophy is based
on a 'vast right-wing conspiracy' against Bharat2! You sound
really scared. 

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[Richard J. Williams]

Bhairitu wrote:
> People "saw" a plane but couldn't say what size so it could 
> have been a missile.  
>
If so, we would find missile parts all over the place instead 
of planes parts, all around the site of the impact, right?

> One man who was quoted as saying he could "see passengers" in 
> the windows actually got angry over the report and said that 
> he only said that "it was close enough that I could have seen
> passengers in windows."  
> 
Non sequitor: nobody said they saw passengers through a window.
But all of the people reported seeing a plane - none reported
seeing a missile.

> Some described it as a "commuter plane" too which would be much
> smaller and missile sized.
> 
You're not even making any sense - a plane was missing. Everyone 
on the ground said it was a plane that was flown into the Pentagon.
Hence, plane parts were found at the site. No missile parts were
found.

> They certainly could end the debate once and for all by showing 
> us all the tapes from the Pentagon cameras as well as the ones 
> they confiscated from adjacent businesses.  For some reason they
> don't.
> 
> I don't think you, I, Judy or anyone else here has a definitive
> answer on the events of 9-11 so we will have to agree to disagree.
>  As far as I'm concerned looking at the timeline of events, the
> behavior of the Bush administration and their foreign occupation
> exercises as well as their use of 9-11 related "fear" to control
> Americans looks far too convenient to me especially when we know
> that the invasions were planned in advance of 9-11.
>
Yah, and monkeys are flying out your butt! Face it, some planes were
hijacked and flown into buildings on 9-11 by radical Islamists.
They even have one of the hijackers passports and the mastermind
is in prison.

From:   Bhairitu
Groups: alt.meditation.transcendental
Subject: Warrantless wiretaps unlikely to be OK'd
Date:   Mon, Nov 13 2006 1:31 pm

Al Qaeda didn't do 9-11. There is a lot of evidence it was 
an inside job, they were just used as patsies.  It helped the 
NeoCons get their "Pearl Harbor",

From: Willytex
Groups: alt.meditation.transcendental, alt.religion.mormon
Subject: Behold These Hands!
Date: Wed, Nov 22 2006 10:45 am
http://tinyurl.com/y8oouh

'Behold My Hands: Evidence for Christ's Visit in Ancient America'
By Steven E. Jones
Brigham Young University

Engineers have dismissed the controlled demolition hypothesis with
reference to the consensus that has formed in the engineering 
community about the collapses.

Read more:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_E._Jones

'9/11: Debunking The Myths'
Popular Mechanics, March, 2005
http://tinyurl.com/3yya5v

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[Angela Mailander]

That is one way to tell the story.  

- Original Message 
From: TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 1:30:50 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go  (of the assailing on 
FFL)









  



--- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, "ruthsimplicity"

 wrote:

>

> So, you can have relatively normal people believing extraordinary

> things.  That is what fascinates me.  Of course, you get paranoid

> people with paranoid theories, that is to be expected.  But normal

> people with odd ideas is really interesting.



Another way of looking at it is that there are

no "normal" people, only really odd people who

have so far been good at projecting an air of

"normality." They suss out the common denominator

beliefs of the consensus reality they live in and

pretend to be those things. But it's just an act.



Scratch the surface and you find that every so-

called "normal" person in the environment is a

seething mass of weird beliefs just waiting for

an opportunity to come out. 






  























Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com 

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "ruthsimplicity"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> So, you can have relatively normal people believing extraordinary
> things.  That is what fascinates me.  Of course, you get paranoid
> people with paranoid theories, that is to be expected.  But normal
> people with odd ideas is really interesting.

Another way of looking at it is that there are
no "normal" people, only really odd people who
have so far been good at projecting an air of
"normality." They suss out the common denominator
beliefs of the consensus reality they live in and
pretend to be those things. But it's just an act.

Scratch the surface and you find that every so-
called "normal" person in the environment is a
seething mass of weird beliefs just waiting for
an opportunity to come out. 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[Vaj]

On Jan 17, 2008, at 6:11 PM, ruthsimplicity wrote:


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> It would be more interesting, for me anyways, to hear some of the
> psychological bases for these phenomenon.
>
> For me, it seemed more 1) a lack of common sense or sometimes people
> who are very naturally imaginative or afraid 2) people without an
> innate understanding of basic engineering tenets or physics--no
> different than say a person who might lack artistic ability or
> mechanical ability. 3) fricking paranoid people, some whom because  
of

> their lack of social skills cannot grok what happens at "higher"
> levels of society, so they fear it, as if there were naturally this
> cabal "out there". But "fear" of the unknown seems central.
>
> It would be interesting to hear Dr. Pete comment on this because I
> feel there's something I'm missing in terms of "the conspiracy
> theorist personality profile".

Do you know some people who seem to have to have an explanation for
everything?


Very few really.


That nothing can simply be a mystery, a puzzle, with no
certain resolution?


That's a sad state of affairs. But it is a part of modern life, any  
day, anywhere.


With a thousand distractions, it not unusual not to feel resolution  
because you're not grounded in something more unchanging.



For example, someone who has led a clean life,
does not smoke, gets plenty of exercise and eats well, but gets
cancer. That person wants an answer and there might not be one. But
they come up with one anyway: alar on the apples, that vaccine with
trace amounts of formaldehyde, or whatever. People like to have
answers and people like to have answers that are in proportion to the
question.


It's just not always that simple.


So, you can have relatively normal people believing extraordinary
things. That is what fascinates me. Of course, you get paranoid
people with paranoid theories, that is to be expected. But normal
people with odd ideas is really interesting.


Normal people with odd ideas is an important part of my life. I  
couldn't imagine life without it!


Despite that, knowing some bit of psychology, there is a genre, a  
psychological profile that could bring organized appreciation of this  
conspiracy meme. Then with that organization, when needed, healing  
could be the outcome...not that that is always the need or the goal.

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[Richard J. Williams]

Vaj wrote: 
> I'm no expert of missiles, but I do no a jet engine when 
> I see one. And there are just too many eyewitnesses who 
> saw the frickin' plane.
>
The damage to the Pentagon on September 11 was caused by 
something other than a hijacked Boeing 757's being crashed 
into its side. False.

Source:

'Hunt the Boeing'
Snopes, September 23, 2004
http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.htm

"Published reports by the National Institute of Standards and
Technology do not support the controlled demolition hypothesis."

'9/11 conspiracy theories'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_conspiracy_theories

'Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report'
Popular Mechanics, March 2005
http://tinyurl.com/rjjpt

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> ruthsimplicity wrote:
> > I favor the psychological theory that people fall for conspiracy
> > theories because of a human tendency to try to link major events with
> > major causes. 
> >
> > People cannot accept that a few terrorists could cause such a disaster
> > of such proportion in the United States.
> Don't forget that the "official" version is also a "conspiracy theory" 
> and admitted to be so by its authors.

"Conspiracy theory"  means a theory about a conspiracy without
verifiable evidence.  This is the modern understanding of a
"conspiracy theory."

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[Bhairitu]

ruthsimplicity wrote:
> I favor the psychological theory that people fall for conspiracy
> theories because of a human tendency to try to link major events with
> major causes. 
>
> People cannot accept that a few terrorists could cause such a disaster
> of such proportion in the United States.
Don't forget that the "official" version is also a "conspiracy theory" 
and admitted to be so by its authors.

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I'll go back to square one and do my research by looking at the
> debunking sites againhoping something clicks and I can get
> Building 7 out of my mind.


It is not a battle Edg.   One of the most difficult things for people to
do is to change their mind.  Remember when you view the evidence that
human nature has us favoring evidence that supports our position and
discounting evidence that does not.  How many times do you find yourself
saying "yes, but. . .?"  There is plenty of research on this cognitive
bias and it is helpful to know if you want to think critically.  So,
take a deep breath, step back,  and convince yourself that you have no
position on the issue, and then read.

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[ruthsimplicity]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> 
> It would be more interesting, for me anyways, to hear some of the  
> psychological bases for these phenomenon.
> 
> For me, it seemed more 1) a lack of common sense or sometimes people  
> who are very naturally imaginative or afraid 2) people without an  
> innate understanding of basic engineering tenets or physics--no  
> different than say a person who might lack artistic ability or  
> mechanical ability. 3) fricking paranoid people, some whom because of  
> their lack of social skills cannot grok what happens at "higher"  
> levels of society, so they fear it, as if there were naturally this  
> cabal "out there". But "fear" of the unknown seems central.
> 
> It would be interesting to hear Dr. Pete comment on this because I  
> feel there's something I'm missing in terms of "the conspiracy  
> theorist personality profile".

Do you know some people who seem to have to have an explanation for
everything?  That nothing can simply be a mystery, a puzzle, with no
certain resolution?  For example,  someone who has led a clean life,
does not smoke, gets plenty of exercise and eats well, but gets
cancer.  That person wants an answer and there might not be one.  But
they come up with one anyway:  alar on the apples, that vaccine with
trace amounts of formaldehyde, or whatever.  People like to have
answers and people like to have answers that are in proportion to the
question. 
 
So, you can have relatively normal people believing extraordinary
things.  That is what fascinates me.  Of course, you get paranoid
people with paranoid theories, that is to be expected.  But normal
people with odd ideas is really interesting.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[Angela Mailander]

You're assuming that ALL people who think that there are possibly conspiracies 
afoot are somehow not quite normal.  Isn't it possible that some simply have 
done some pretty adequate research or have real insight into the political 
climate that would spawn something like a false flag attack?  


- Original Message 
From: Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2008 4:16:41 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing 
on FFL)



On Jan 17, 2008, at 5:02 PM, ruthsimplicity wrote:



I favor the psychological theory that people fall for conspiracy
theories because of a human tendency to try to link major events with
major causes. 

People cannot accept that a few terrorists could cause such a disaster
of such proportion in the United States.





It would be more interesting, for me anyways, to hear some of the psychological 
bases for these phenomenon.


For me, it seemed more 1) a lack of common sense or sometimes people who are 
very naturally imaginative or afraid 2) people without an innate understanding 
of basic engineering tenets or physics--no different than say a person who 
might lack artistic ability or mechanical ability. 3) fricking paranoid people, 
some whom because of their lack of social skills cannot grok what happens at 
"higher" levels of society, so they fear it, as if there were naturally this 
cabal "out there". But "fear" of the unknown seems central.


It would be interesting to hear Dr. Pete comment on this because I feel there's 
something I'm missing in terms of "the conspiracy theorist personality profile".


Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[Vaj]

On Jan 17, 2008, at 5:02 PM, ruthsimplicity wrote:



I favor the psychological theory that people fall for conspiracy
theories because of a human tendency to try to link major events with
major causes.

People cannot accept that a few terrorists could cause such a disaster
of such proportion in the United States.



It would be more interesting, for me anyways, to hear some of the  
psychological bases for these phenomenon.


For me, it seemed more 1) a lack of common sense or sometimes people  
who are very naturally imaginative or afraid 2) people without an  
innate understanding of basic engineering tenets or physics--no  
different than say a person who might lack artistic ability or  
mechanical ability. 3) fricking paranoid people, some whom because of  
their lack of social skills cannot grok what happens at "higher"  
levels of society, so they fear it, as if there were naturally this  
cabal "out there". But "fear" of the unknown seems central.


It would be interesting to hear Dr. Pete comment on this because I  
feel there's something I'm missing in terms of "the conspiracy  
theorist personality profile".

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[Angela Mailander]

Well, Edg, you're in good company at least.  Danny Sheehan was in Fairfield for 
several public talks.  I asked him about 9/11, and he pretty much agrees with 
us.  I also asked if there was any hope the truth would ever become public, and 
he said he thought so but people feared for their lives. 


- Original Message 
From: Duveyoung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2008 4:04:45 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on 
FFL)

Curtis,

Yeah, I know, and it sucks to be me when I read your below questions
that seem to point to the event being far too big an operation and
involve too many folks in-the-know.

My general answer to you is that it could have taken far fewer
"actually in the know" workers guiding dozens of others to install
devices that they were told were merely electric monitors but in fact
were bombs with connections to a master-bomb- blowing-precisel y-timed
gizmo-thingamajiggy -whatchacallit- kazinski- model-666.

I used your same reasoning below to finally quell my Y2K fears several
months ahead of 2000 -- too many folks would know that their
organization was about to fold due to computer malfunctions and would
have sent the stock market into an avalanche of options, gold would
have gone through the roof, many whistle blowers coming forth, etc.

I'll go back to square one and do my research by looking at the
debunking sites againhoping something clicks and I can get
Building 7 out of my mind. 

It should have fallen differently if it was a "natural" collapse --
that's my intuition. Hunks and chunks and whole portions would have
fallen first, the structure would have leaned in the direction of the
bulge, listed and fell that way. But the thing just fell straight
down. The guy who said "we pulled it" could not have meant that he'd
sent in demolition experts -- cuz they would be at high risk while
putting the explosive charges around the building to get it to come
down in its own footprint... .therefore, it was done ahead of time by
EVIL MURDERERS IN POWER. Like this I keep the damned issue clanging
inside my head.

Stay tuned. I'm not fit to battle it out with you and Judy, but I
strongly feel you guys, though deeply sincere and scholarly, have
missed some big tells. I pledge to announce my mind changing if that
happens. 

Edg

--- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, "curtisdeltablues"
 wrote:
>
> This is such a zombie thread like the Terminator! You think it's dead
> and then its baaack.
> 
> Let me get this straight...no investigative journalist has been able
> to make themselves instantly famous and worth millions by finding out
> any definitive proof of a 9-11 conspiracy? And everyone in on the
> conspiracy has had the seamless commitment to not rat out anyone else?
> And these are the same assholes who elbow me out of the way getting
> on the metro in DC? No one wanted to become instantly famous by
> ratting out the others, writing a book, becoming the darling of the
> talk show circuit and a national hero for exposing the plot? No one
> bragged to their girlfriend or boyfriend after a couple of Cosmos
> about what a big 9-11 pimp they were? No one got cold feet and figured
> they had better make a deal before it all comes out? No one got
> religion and realized what a demonic prick they had been and how they
> could get right with the Lord? No changes of heart? And every single
> person on all the groups who investigated this for months were in on
> it too? Perfect secrecy was maintained by ALL of them? No politician
> wanted to become a national hero, no member of congress or the house
> with higher aspirations, none of them were able to investigate this at
> least as well as the conspiracy guys?
> 
> Any theory that includes a whole bunch of Washington A-holes keeping
> their mouths shut and not throwing their co-conspirators under the bus
> to save their own ass and their family's, or people not wanting to
> become an instant millionaire hero by exposing this with real
> evidence, is gett'g a big "yeah right" from me. 
> 
> But despite the inability of highly motivated reporters who would love
> nothing more than to become the next Woodward or Bernstein with such a
> story, a guy putting up a Website has the "inside" scoop"?
> 
> Or are ALL the reporters IN THE WORLD in on it too? 
> 
> 
> Die zombie die! !!! 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, Bhairitu  wrote:
> >
> > Vaj wrote:
> > >
> > > On Jan 17, 2008, at 2:35 PM, Duveyoung wrote:
> > >
> > >> Judy and Vaj, are you still reading down this far into my
"nonsense?"
> > >> I am sincerely hoping 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[Angela Mailander]

I think a false flag attack would be much harder for Americans to accept.  It's 
a conspiracy theory either way.  

- Original Message 
From: ruthsimplicity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2008 4:02:02 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on 
FFL)


I favor the psychological theory that people fall for conspiracy
theories because of a human tendency to try to link major events with
major causes. 

People cannot accept that a few terrorists could cause such a disaster
of such proportion in the United States.




Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com 

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[Duveyoung]

Curtis,

Yeah, I know, and it sucks to be me when I read your below questions
that seem to point to the event being far too big an operation and
involve too many folks in-the-know.

My general answer to you is that it could have taken far fewer
"actually in the know" workers guiding dozens of others to install
devices that they were told were merely electric monitors but in fact
were bombs with connections to a master-bomb-blowing-precisely-timed
gizmo-thingamajiggy-whatchacallit-kazinski-model-666.

I used your same reasoning below to finally quell my Y2K fears several
months ahead of 2000 -- too many folks would know that their
organization was about to fold due to computer malfunctions and would
have sent the stock market into an avalanche of options, gold would
have gone through the roof, many whistle blowers coming forth, etc.

I'll go back to square one and do my research by looking at the
debunking sites againhoping something clicks and I can get
Building 7 out of my mind.  

It should have fallen differently if it was a "natural" collapse --
that's my intuition.  Hunks and chunks and whole portions would have
fallen first, the structure would have leaned in the direction of the
bulge, listed and fell that way.  But the thing just fell straight
down. The guy who said "we pulled it" could not have meant that he'd
sent in demolition experts -- cuz they would be at high risk while
putting the explosive charges around the building to get it to come
down in its own footprinttherefore, it was done ahead of time by
EVIL MURDERERS IN POWER. Like this I keep the damned issue clanging
inside my head.

Stay tuned.  I'm not fit to battle it out with you and Judy, but I
strongly feel you guys, though deeply sincere and scholarly, have
missed some big tells.  I pledge to announce my mind changing if that
happens.  

Edg

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> This is such a zombie thread like the Terminator!  You think it's dead
> and then its baaack.
> 
> Let me get this straight...no investigative journalist has been able
> to make themselves instantly famous and worth millions by finding out
> any definitive proof of a 9-11 conspiracy? And everyone in on the
> conspiracy has had the seamless commitment to not rat out anyone else?
>  And these are the same assholes who elbow me out of the way getting
> on the metro in DC?  No one wanted to become instantly famous by
> ratting out the others, writing a book, becoming the darling of the
> talk show circuit and a national hero for exposing the plot?  No one
> bragged to their girlfriend or boyfriend after a couple of Cosmos
> about what a big 9-11 pimp they were? No one got cold feet and figured
> they had better make a deal before it all comes out?  No one got
> religion and realized what a demonic prick they had been and how they
> could get right with the Lord?  No changes of heart? And every single
> person on all the groups who investigated this for months were in on
> it too?  Perfect secrecy was maintained by ALL of them? No politician
>  wanted to become a national hero, no member of congress or the house
> with higher aspirations, none of them were able to investigate this at
> least as well as the conspiracy guys?
> 
> Any theory that includes a whole bunch of Washington A-holes keeping
> their mouths shut and not throwing their co-conspirators under the bus
> to save their own ass and their family's, or people not wanting to
> become an instant millionaire hero by exposing this with real
> evidence, is gett'g a big "yeah right" from me.  
> 
> But despite the inability of highly motivated reporters who would love
> nothing more than to become the next Woodward or Bernstein with such a
> story, a guy putting up a Website has the "inside" scoop"?
> 
> Or are ALL the reporters IN THE WORLD in on it too? 
> 
> 
> Die zombie die 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
> >
> > Vaj wrote:
> > >
> > > On Jan 17, 2008, at 2:35 PM, Duveyoung wrote:
> > >
> > >> Judy and Vaj, are you still reading down this far into my
"nonsense?"
> > >> I am sincerely hoping you two can explain these two issues.
Given the
> > >> confidence you both seem to "have in spades" when debating this
> topic,
> > >> I'm hopeful my POV can be augmented. Why? Cuz who wants to live in
> > >> my reality where the government is so evil? So save me, please.
> > >
> > >
> > > See my last post on building 7.
> > >
> > > Re: The Pentagon.
> > >
> > > Just after the tragedy of 9/11 we were contacted by the American
Red 
> > > Cross Disaster team regarding the disaster. My wife and 4 others
were 
> > > to chosen disembark for debriefing in Philadelphia. After
debriefing 
> > > the teams there assembled divided into three teams: ground zero, NJ 
> > > and the Pentagon.
> > >
> > > My wife got the Pentagon assignment.
> > >
> > > She toured the site and saw first hand what happened. It was a
plane, 

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[ruthsimplicity]

I favor the psychological theory that people fall for conspiracy
theories because of a human tendency to try to link major events with
major causes. 

People cannot accept that a few terrorists could cause such a disaster
of such proportion in the United States.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[Vaj]

On Jan 17, 2008, at 3:38 PM, authfriend wrote:


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Until I get a good explanation of these facts, I won't bother
> presenting the two dozen other oddities that support the conspiracy
> theory, but some of them are almost as troubling and obvious as the
> above.

Start with the series "9/11 Debunked" on YouTube.



Good pointer J.!

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[The Secret]

No one wanted to be part of the follow on to the Ruby and Oswald show?

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> This is such a zombie thread like the Terminator!  You think it's dead
> and then its baaack.
> 
> Let me get this straight...no investigative journalist has been able
> to make themselves instantly famous and worth millions by finding out
> any definitive proof of a 9-11 conspiracy? And everyone in on the
> conspiracy has had the seamless commitment to not rat out anyone else?
>  And these are the same assholes who elbow me out of the way getting
> on the metro in DC?  No one wanted to become instantly famous by
> ratting out the others, writing a book, becoming the darling of the
> talk show circuit and a national hero for exposing the plot?  No one
> bragged to their girlfriend or boyfriend after a couple of Cosmos
> about what a big 9-11 pimp they were? No one got cold feet and figured
> they had better make a deal before it all comes out?  No one got
> religion and realized what a demonic prick they had been and how they
> could get right with the Lord?  No changes of heart? And every single
> person on all the groups who investigated this for months were in on
> it too?  Perfect secrecy was maintained by ALL of them? No politician
>  wanted to become a national hero, no member of congress or the house
> with higher aspirations, none of them were able to investigate this at
> least as well as the conspiracy guys?
> 
> Any theory that includes a whole bunch of Washington A-holes keeping
> their mouths shut and not throwing their co-conspirators under the bus
> to save their own ass and their family's, or people not wanting to
> become an instant millionaire hero by exposing this with real
> evidence, is gett'g a big "yeah right" from me.  
> 
> But despite the inability of highly motivated reporters who would love
> nothing more than to become the next Woodward or Bernstein with such a
> story, a guy putting up a Website has the "inside" scoop"?
> 
> Or are ALL the reporters IN THE WORLD in on it too? 
> 
> 
> Die zombie die 

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[curtisdeltablues]

This is such a zombie thread like the Terminator!  You think it's dead
and then its baaack.

Let me get this straight...no investigative journalist has been able
to make themselves instantly famous and worth millions by finding out
any definitive proof of a 9-11 conspiracy? And everyone in on the
conspiracy has had the seamless commitment to not rat out anyone else?
 And these are the same assholes who elbow me out of the way getting
on the metro in DC?  No one wanted to become instantly famous by
ratting out the others, writing a book, becoming the darling of the
talk show circuit and a national hero for exposing the plot?  No one
bragged to their girlfriend or boyfriend after a couple of Cosmos
about what a big 9-11 pimp they were? No one got cold feet and figured
they had better make a deal before it all comes out?  No one got
religion and realized what a demonic prick they had been and how they
could get right with the Lord?  No changes of heart? And every single
person on all the groups who investigated this for months were in on
it too?  Perfect secrecy was maintained by ALL of them? No politician
 wanted to become a national hero, no member of congress or the house
with higher aspirations, none of them were able to investigate this at
least as well as the conspiracy guys?

Any theory that includes a whole bunch of Washington A-holes keeping
their mouths shut and not throwing their co-conspirators under the bus
to save their own ass and their family's, or people not wanting to
become an instant millionaire hero by exposing this with real
evidence, is gett'g a big "yeah right" from me.  

But despite the inability of highly motivated reporters who would love
nothing more than to become the next Woodward or Bernstein with such a
story, a guy putting up a Website has the "inside" scoop"?

Or are ALL the reporters IN THE WORLD in on it too? 


Die zombie die 




--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Vaj wrote:
> >
> > On Jan 17, 2008, at 2:35 PM, Duveyoung wrote:
> >
> >> Judy and Vaj, are you still reading down this far into my "nonsense?"
> >> I am sincerely hoping you two can explain these two issues. Given the
> >> confidence you both seem to "have in spades" when debating this
topic,
> >> I'm hopeful my POV can be augmented. Why? Cuz who wants to live in
> >> my reality where the government is so evil? So save me, please.
> >
> >
> > See my last post on building 7.
> >
> > Re: The Pentagon.
> >
> > Just after the tragedy of 9/11 we were contacted by the American Red 
> > Cross Disaster team regarding the disaster. My wife and 4 others were 
> > to chosen disembark for debriefing in Philadelphia. After debriefing 
> > the teams there assembled divided into three teams: ground zero, NJ 
> > and the Pentagon.
> >
> > My wife got the Pentagon assignment.
> >
> > She toured the site and saw first hand what happened. It was a plane, 
> > not a missile. The chunk of a jet engine kinda made that very clear. 
> > One the interesting thing, was the fact at such high speeds aluminum 
> > actually "shatters" as if it was glass into tiny pieces. Thus much of 
> > the debris that was metal was in tiny little pieces.
> And she is an expert at discerning a missile engine (like a global
hawk) 
> and a commercial aircraft engine?  How do you explain so many 
> experienced airline pilots saying they couldn't even perform the 
> maneuver required to fly an airliner into the Pentagon?
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Yes, Building Seven was the clincher.

Angela, read what Vaj just posted about Building 7,
and then debunk it for us, please.

> The plane allegedly crashing in PA was another dead give-away.  
> When planes crash, you don't have debris over several square miles 

Except that all the debris was spread out
*ahead of the plane*, in an area it had not
flown over. If it had been shot down before
the crash, the debris would have fallen
behind where it crashed. The debris was
ejected when the plane hit the ground and
blown up and out in the direction the plane
was heading.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ni4CzLznxjw
United 93 not Shot Down

> and no bodies.

Over 1,500 pieces of bodies were found.

> That's the scenario when they're shot down (and yes, incredibly, 
I've seen both).  When they crash, the debris might cover as much as 
a city block, and there would definitely be bodies and body parts.

Not when they crash flying 575 mph upside down
at an 80 degree to the ground.

> The phone call was another huge problem.

That phone call was made at 9:58 and lasted
until 9:59. The plane was at 6,000 feet at
that point. Then, before it crashed, it rose
to 10,000 feet. If what the man on the phone
had heard was a missile striking the plane,
it's just a *teensy bit* unlikely that the
plane would have been able to gain 4,000
feet in altitude *after* it had been hit.

> But the first problem I had was just seeing the initial
> footage of planes hitting buildings, and then the
> absolutely and stunningly disproportionate way the 
> buildings "reacted" to that.

But we now know it wasn't "disproportionate"
at all. I mean, you could just as well say
that Hiroshima and Nagasaki "reacted"
disproportionately to the dropping of a
couple of bombs small enough to be carried
by B-29s.

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 9-11 was just a "shock and awe" operation performed on the American 
> people just like one that was done on the Iraqis.  It was done to 
scare 
> the shit out of the public to make them cower and give up their 
rights.  
> Even it doesn't work on some of us who see right through it.  9-11 
was 
> way too big an operation for a little rag-tag "terrorist" group to 
pull off.
> 
> Angela Mailander wrote:
> > Yes, Building Seven was the clincher. The plane allegedly 
crashing in PA was another dead give-away.  When planes crash, you 
don't have debris over several square miles and no bodies.  That's 
the scenario when they're shot down (and yes, incredibly, I've seen 
both).  When they crash, the debris might cover as much as a city 
block, and there would definitely be bodies and body parts.  The 
phone call was another huge problem.  But the first problem I had was 
just seeing the initial footage of planes hitting buildings, and then 
the absolutely and stunningly disproportionate way the 
buildings "reacted" to that.  
> >
> >
Get back on the Programme !

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 into the fray again I go (of the assailing on FFL)

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Until I get a good explanation of these facts, I won't bother
> presenting the two dozen other oddities that support the conspiracy
> theory, but some of them are almost as troubling and obvious as the
> above.  

Start with the series "9/11 Debunked" on YouTube.

Once you've watched all of them--there's quite a
few--get back to us, OK?

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 Commission on 911 Puts "apparently suspicious con...

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
> wrote:

> > There really isn't anything much lower-vibe than
> > claiming those who criticize you do so because they
> > haven't had as much "personal, subjective spiritual
> > experience" as you have.
> 
> I was merely citing your *own* words, back on
> a.m.t. when you were a little more honest, and
> stated freely (many times) that you had never had 
> any experience of enlightenment/witnessing in activity
> that had lasted more than a couple of minutes after
> program (as opposed to, say, several days, weeks,
> months or years, as reported by other posters there). 
> 
> Then for some reason you stopped admitting your lack
> of such experiences publicly, and started hinting that 
> what you'd said before wasn't the whole story. Whatever.  :-)

In the first place, using a lack of personal experience
to attack someone because they've criticized you is
inherently low-vibe.  As I said, it doesn't get much
lower.

So it's not any the less low-vibe to use what someone
has said about their personal experience to one
audience for the purpose of attacking that person
before a different audience.

In the third place, it's downright moronic to assume
that a person's spiritual experience is *static*--
that what they've reported at one point is never
going to change.

> Here's your opportunity to set the record straight:

No, I don't discuss my spiritual experience on demand,
as I've told you many times before.  I'll talk about
it when and if I feel like talking about it; I don't feel 
the need, as you obviously do, to boast about it or
play dueling experiences in an attempt to put somebody
down.

> Have you ever had an experience of 24/7 witnessing
> (the experience you yourself tend to associate with
> CC) that has lasted longer than a couple of minutes?
> For example, have you ever had such an experience 
> that has ever lasted an hour?  A day?  Several days?
> A week?  Two weeks?  A month?  A year?
> 
> If you don't answer, you can hardly base us for assuming
> that your experience is limited to what you used to talk
> about before you stopped talking about such things.  :-)

Well, yes, one can certainly "base" (I think you meant
"blame") you for making that assumption.  It makes no
sense, for one thing, as noted.  Also as noted, your
tendency both to make boastful claims about your own
spiritual experience and to use it as a weapon against
your critics when they decline to do the same reveals
that, as I said:

> > It certainly makes the point that having spiritual
> > experiences does not a spiritual person make, though.
> 
> Yeah, we know that's your position.  Interesting
> position for someone who's never *had* those 
> experiences to take, eh?  :-)  :-)  :-)

It would be for someone who's never had spiritual
experiences, yes indeed.  Were you perhaps assuming
that *only* those who had never had spiritual
experiences would take that position?

Now, would you like to attempt to justify your other
major misstatement as well?  To wit:

and all three have a history of
> > > > reacting badly and agressively when people here who
> > > > *have* had such experiences choose to report them.







 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~--> 
Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing
http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM
~-> 

To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 Commission on 911 Puts "apparently suspicious con...

[Nelson]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
> > wrote:
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" 
>  
> > > wrote:
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
> > > > wrote:
> > > 
> > > > > > The one thing that these three posters have in
> > > > > > common?  All three have a history of being a little 
> > > > > > light in the loafers in terms of personal, subjective 
> > > > > > spiritual experience
> > > > > 
> > > > > Interesting that Barry claims to know our
> > > > > history of personal, subjective spiritual
> > > > > experience.
> > > > > 
> > > > > , and all three have a history of 
> > > > > > reacting badly and agressively when people here who 
> > > > > > *have* had such experiences choose to report them.
> > > > > 
> > > > > In fact, only one of us has done so (the
> > > > > person currently posting as anon_sleuth_ff).
> > > > > 
> > > > > Oh, wait, Shemp *did* have some questions about
> > > > > Barry's claim to have seen Frederick Lenz
> > > > > levitate that Barry didn't appreciate.
> > > > 
> > > > That was nothing compared to the deeply spiritual way that 
> Barry 
> > > > responded to my request that he actually tell us which other 
> > > > spiritual techniques that he claimed that were out there that 
> > > > were "effortless".
> > > 
> > > There really isn't anything much lower-vibe than
> > > claiming those who criticize you do so because they
> > > haven't had as much "personal, subjective spiritual
> > > experience" as you have.
> > 
> > I was merely citing your *own* words, back on
> > a.m.t. when you were a little more honest, and
> > stated freely (many times) that you had never had 
> > any experience of enlightenment/witnessing in activity
> > that had lasted more than a couple of minutes after
> > program (as opposed to, say, several days, weeks,
> > months or years, as reported by other posters there). 
> > 
> > Then for some reason you stopped admitting your lack
> > of such experiences publicly, and started hinting that 
> > what you'd said before wasn't the whole story. Whatever.  :-)
> > 
> > Here's your opportunity to set the record straight:
> 
> ...and hereafter Barry becomes the New Age's Joe McCarthy...
> 
snip
+++  Long weekend...





 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~--> 
Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing
http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM
~-> 

To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 Commission on 911 Puts "apparently suspicious con...

[shempmcgurk]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
> wrote:
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" 
 
> > wrote:
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
> > > wrote:
> > 
> > > > > The one thing that these three posters have in
> > > > > common?  All three have a history of being a little 
> > > > > light in the loafers in terms of personal, subjective 
> > > > > spiritual experience
> > > > 
> > > > Interesting that Barry claims to know our
> > > > history of personal, subjective spiritual
> > > > experience.
> > > > 
> > > > , and all three have a history of 
> > > > > reacting badly and agressively when people here who 
> > > > > *have* had such experiences choose to report them.
> > > > 
> > > > In fact, only one of us has done so (the
> > > > person currently posting as anon_sleuth_ff).
> > > > 
> > > > Oh, wait, Shemp *did* have some questions about
> > > > Barry's claim to have seen Frederick Lenz
> > > > levitate that Barry didn't appreciate.
> > > 
> > > That was nothing compared to the deeply spiritual way that 
Barry 
> > > responded to my request that he actually tell us which other 
> > > spiritual techniques that he claimed that were out there that 
> > > were "effortless".
> > 
> > There really isn't anything much lower-vibe than
> > claiming those who criticize you do so because they
> > haven't had as much "personal, subjective spiritual
> > experience" as you have.
> 
> I was merely citing your *own* words, back on
> a.m.t. when you were a little more honest, and
> stated freely (many times) that you had never had 
> any experience of enlightenment/witnessing in activity
> that had lasted more than a couple of minutes after
> program (as opposed to, say, several days, weeks,
> months or years, as reported by other posters there). 
> 
> Then for some reason you stopped admitting your lack
> of such experiences publicly, and started hinting that 
> what you'd said before wasn't the whole story. Whatever.  :-)
> 
> Here's your opportunity to set the record straight:




...and hereafter Barry becomes the New Age's Joe McCarthy...





> Have you ever had an experience of 24/7 witnessing
> (the experience you yourself tend to associate with
> CC) that has lasted longer than a couple of minutes?
> For example, have you ever had such an experience 
> that has ever lasted an hour?  A day?  Several days?
> A week?  Two weeks?  A month?  A year?
> 
> If you don't answer, you can hardly base us for assuming
> that your experience is limited to what you used to talk
> about before you stopped talking about such things.  :-)
> 
> > It certainly makes the point that having spiritual
> > experiences does not a spiritual person make, though.
> 
> Yeah, we know that's your position.  Interesting
> position for someone who's never *had* those 
> experiences to take, eh?  :-)  :-)  :-)
>






 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~--> 
Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing
http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM
~-> 

To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 Commission on 911 Puts "apparently suspicious con...

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk"  
> wrote:
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
> > wrote:
> 
> > > > The one thing that these three posters have in
> > > > common?  All three have a history of being a little 
> > > > light in the loafers in terms of personal, subjective 
> > > > spiritual experience
> > > 
> > > Interesting that Barry claims to know our
> > > history of personal, subjective spiritual
> > > experience.
> > > 
> > > , and all three have a history of 
> > > > reacting badly and agressively when people here who 
> > > > *have* had such experiences choose to report them.
> > > 
> > > In fact, only one of us has done so (the
> > > person currently posting as anon_sleuth_ff).
> > > 
> > > Oh, wait, Shemp *did* have some questions about
> > > Barry's claim to have seen Frederick Lenz
> > > levitate that Barry didn't appreciate.
> > 
> > That was nothing compared to the deeply spiritual way that Barry 
> > responded to my request that he actually tell us which other 
> > spiritual techniques that he claimed that were out there that 
> > were "effortless".
> 
> There really isn't anything much lower-vibe than
> claiming those who criticize you do so because they
> haven't had as much "personal, subjective spiritual
> experience" as you have.

I was merely citing your *own* words, back on
a.m.t. when you were a little more honest, and
stated freely (many times) that you had never had 
any experience of enlightenment/witnessing in activity
that had lasted more than a couple of minutes after
program (as opposed to, say, several days, weeks,
months or years, as reported by other posters there). 

Then for some reason you stopped admitting your lack
of such experiences publicly, and started hinting that 
what you'd said before wasn't the whole story. Whatever.  :-)

Here's your opportunity to set the record straight:
Have you ever had an experience of 24/7 witnessing
(the experience you yourself tend to associate with
CC) that has lasted longer than a couple of minutes?
For example, have you ever had such an experience 
that has ever lasted an hour?  A day?  Several days?
A week?  Two weeks?  A month?  A year?

If you don't answer, you can hardly base us for assuming
that your experience is limited to what you used to talk
about before you stopped talking about such things.  :-)

> It certainly makes the point that having spiritual
> experiences does not a spiritual person make, though.

Yeah, we know that's your position.  Interesting
position for someone who's never *had* those 
experiences to take, eh?  :-)  :-)  :-)







To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 Commission on 911 Puts "apparently suspicious con...

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
> wrote:

> > > The one thing that these three posters have in
> > > common?  All three have a history of being a little 
> > > light in the loafers in terms of personal, subjective 
> > > spiritual experience
> > 
> > Interesting that Barry claims to know our
> > history of personal, subjective spiritual
> > experience.
> > 
> > , and all three have a history of 
> > > reacting badly and agressively when people here who 
> > > *have* had such experiences choose to report them.
> > 
> > In fact, only one of us has done so (the
> > person currently posting as anon_sleuth_ff).
> > 
> > Oh, wait, Shemp *did* have some questions about
> > Barry's claim to have seen Frederick Lenz
> > levitate that Barry didn't appreciate.
> 
> That was nothing compared to the deeply spiritual way that Barry 
> responded to my request that he actually tell us which other 
> spiritual techniques that he claimed that were out there that 
> were "effortless".

There really isn't anything much lower-vibe than
claiming those who criticize you do so because they
haven't had as much "personal, subjective spiritual
experience" as you have.

It certainly makes the point that having spiritual
experiences does not a spiritual person make, though.






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 Commission on 911 Puts "apparently suspicious con...

[shempmcgurk]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  
> > wrote:
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The Raja of Compton California now declares this thread
> > > > boring and ended!
> > > 
> > > Either that or it should be retitled,
> > > "How three people with out of control egos
> > > hijacked a spiritual group and brought it
> > > down to the level of infantile egobabble."
> > 
> > I think there is a lesson to be learned from
> > the veritable orgy of flatulence that was FFL
> > this weekend.
> > 
> > A few people, with different political leanings
> > but with one thing in common, managed to side-
> > track ALL spiritual discussion on the newsgroup
> > and turn Fairfield Life into a 500+-post demon-
> > stration of, "It's all about US...*WE* are what's 
> > important here!"
> 
> Or, it was a topic all three of us were deeply
> interested in.
> 
> > The one thing that these three posters have in
> > common?  All three have a history of being a little 
> > light in the loafers in terms of personal, subjective 
> > spiritual experience
> 
> Interesting that Barry claims to know our
> history of personal, subjective spiritual
> experience.
> 
> , and all three have a history of 
> > reacting badly and agressively when people here who 
> > *have* had such experiences choose to report them.
> 
> In fact, only one of us has done so (the
> person currently posting as anon_sleuth_ff).
> 
> Oh, wait, Shemp *did* have some questions about
> Barry's claim to have seen Frederick Lenz
> levitate that Barry didn't appreciate.




That was nothing compared to the deeply spiritual way that Barry 
responded to my request that he actually tell us which other 
spiritual techniques that he claimed that were out there that 
were "effortless".





> 
> > One might suggest that the people who have no exper-
> > iences with higher states of consciousness of their
> > own to talk about, and who have a history of being
> > agressive and skeptical when others talk about them,
> > might subconsciously be wanting to shift the focus of
> > Fairfield Life *AWAY* from such discussions, and 
> > *TOWARDS* discussions that focus on "I am right, you
> > are wrong," "I have no hidden agenda but you have one,"
> > and "I'm smart and you're not." In other words, the 
> > mundane level at which *they* live and operate.
> 
> One might suggest this, but if one suggested it
> about the thread in question, thread, one would
> be quite wrong.
> 
> But being wrong has never stopped Barry from making
> suggestions yet.
> 
> 
> > 
> > Voila.  A few 500-post slugfests and all that gets
> > talked about is mundane, everyday political bull-
> > shit, and no one is talking about enlightenment
> > any more.
> > 
> > Welcome to the alt.meditation.transcendalization
> > of Fairfield Life.  
> > 
> > :-)  :-)  :-)
> >
>






 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~--> 
Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing
http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM
~-> 

To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 Commission on 911 Puts "apparently suspicious con...

[anony_sleuth_ff]

Oh my. The bizzare little dream worlds people weave for themselves. A
coping mechanism I suppose. Posts like are wonderful tools for
culturing compassion -- by building recognizing and remembering how
challenged and deluded some people are.



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  
> wrote:
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote:
> > >
> > > The Raja of Compton California now declares this thread
> > > boring and ended!
> > 
> > Either that or it should be retitled,
> > "How three people with out of control egos
> > hijacked a spiritual group and brought it
> > down to the level of infantile egobabble."
> 
> I think there is a lesson to be learned from
> the veritable orgy of flatulence that was FFL
> this weekend.
> 
> A few people, with different political leanings
> but with one thing in common, managed to side-
> track ALL spiritual discussion on the newsgroup
> and turn Fairfield Life into a 500+-post demon-
> stration of, "It's all about US...*WE* are what's 
> important here!"
> 
> The one thing that these three posters have in
> common?  All three have a history of being a little 
> light in the loafers in terms of personal, subjective 
> spiritual experience, and all three have a history of 
> reacting badly and agressively when people here who 
> *have* had such experiences choose to report them.
> 
> One might suggest that the people who have no exper-
> iences with higher states of consciousness of their
> own to talk about, and who have a history of being
> agressive and skeptical when others talk about them,
> might subconsciously be wanting to shift the focus of
> Fairfield Life *AWAY* from such discussions, and 
> *TOWARDS* discussions that focus on "I am right, you
> are wrong," "I have no hidden agenda but you have one,"
> and "I'm smart and you're not." In other words, the 
> mundane level at which *they* live and operate.
> 
> Voila.  A few 500-post slugfests and all that gets
> talked about is mundane, everyday political bull-
> shit, and no one is talking about enlightenment
> any more.
> 
> Welcome to the alt.meditation.transcendalization
> of Fairfield Life.  
> 
> :-)  :-)  :-)
>






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 Commission on 911 Puts "apparently suspicious con...

[shempmcgurk]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  
> wrote:
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote:
> > >
> > > The Raja of Compton California now declares this thread
> > > boring and ended!
> > 
> > Either that or it should be retitled,
> > "How three people with out of control egos
> > hijacked a spiritual group and brought it
> > down to the level of infantile egobabble."
> 
> I think there is a lesson to be learned from
> the veritable orgy of flatulence that was FFL
> this weekend.
> 
> A few people, with different political leanings
> but with one thing in common, managed to side-
> track ALL spiritual discussion on the newsgroup
> and turn Fairfield Life into a 500+-post demon-
> stration of, "It's all about US...*WE* are what's 
> important here!"
> 
> The one thing that these three posters have in
> common?  All three have a history of being a little 
> light in the loafers in terms of personal, subjective 
> spiritual experience, and all three have a history of 
> reacting badly and agressively when people here who 
> *have* had such experiences choose to report them.
> 
> One might suggest that the people who have no exper-
> iences with higher states of consciousness of their
> own to talk about, and who have a history of being
> agressive and skeptical when others talk about them,
> might subconsciously be wanting to shift the focus of
> Fairfield Life *AWAY* from such discussions, and 
> *TOWARDS* discussions that focus on "I am right, you
> are wrong," "I have no hidden agenda but you have one,"
> and "I'm smart and you're not." In other words, the 
> mundane level at which *they* live and operate.
> 
> Voila.  A few 500-post slugfests and all that gets
> talked about is mundane, everyday political bull-
> shit, and no one is talking about enlightenment
> any more.
> 
> Welcome to the alt.meditation.transcendalization
> of Fairfield Life.  
> 
> :-)  :-)  :-)




This coming from the person who has spent, literally, every day of 
the last 10 years of his life in childish, meaningless, hour-upon-
hour debate with Judy Stein.





>






 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~--> 
Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing
http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM
~-> 

To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 Commission on 911 Puts "apparently suspicious con...

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  
> wrote:
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote:
> > >
> > > The Raja of Compton California now declares this thread
> > > boring and ended!
> > 
> > Either that or it should be retitled,
> > "How three people with out of control egos
> > hijacked a spiritual group and brought it
> > down to the level of infantile egobabble."
> 
> I think there is a lesson to be learned from
> the veritable orgy of flatulence that was FFL
> this weekend.
> 
> A few people, with different political leanings
> but with one thing in common, managed to side-
> track ALL spiritual discussion on the newsgroup
> and turn Fairfield Life into a 500+-post demon-
> stration of, "It's all about US...*WE* are what's 
> important here!"

Or, it was a topic all three of us were deeply
interested in.

> The one thing that these three posters have in
> common?  All three have a history of being a little 
> light in the loafers in terms of personal, subjective 
> spiritual experience

Interesting that Barry claims to know our
history of personal, subjective spiritual
experience.

, and all three have a history of 
> reacting badly and agressively when people here who 
> *have* had such experiences choose to report them.

In fact, only one of us has done so (the
person currently posting as anon_sleuth_ff).

Oh, wait, Shemp *did* have some questions about
Barry's claim to have seen Frederick Lenz
levitate that Barry didn't appreciate.

> One might suggest that the people who have no exper-
> iences with higher states of consciousness of their
> own to talk about, and who have a history of being
> agressive and skeptical when others talk about them,
> might subconsciously be wanting to shift the focus of
> Fairfield Life *AWAY* from such discussions, and 
> *TOWARDS* discussions that focus on "I am right, you
> are wrong," "I have no hidden agenda but you have one,"
> and "I'm smart and you're not." In other words, the 
> mundane level at which *they* live and operate.

One might suggest this, but if one suggested it
about the thread in question, thread, one would
be quite wrong.

But being wrong has never stopped Barry from making
suggestions yet.


> 
> Voila.  A few 500-post slugfests and all that gets
> talked about is mundane, everyday political bull-
> shit, and no one is talking about enlightenment
> any more.
> 
> Welcome to the alt.meditation.transcendalization
> of Fairfield Life.  
> 
> :-)  :-)  :-)
>






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 Commission on 911 Puts "apparently suspicious con...

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Translation: Barry is jealous that Judy got all the publicity so
> now he wants to cash in on it by piggybacking a guest editorial.

If you look back on FFL and on alt.m.t, you'll find
that Barry is almost always driven to write a "guest
editorial" concerning threads I've been heavily
involved in.






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 Commission on 911 Puts "apparently suspicious con...

[sparaig]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
> >
> > Translation: Barry is jealous that Judy got all the publicity
> > so now he wants to cash in on it by piggybacking a guest 
> > editorial.
> 
> "Got all the publicity?"
> 
> I was partly joking about the attempt to hijack FFL
> and turn it into the cesspool that you guys turned
> a.m.t. into, but I guess maybe I was onto something.
> Do you *really* think in terms of "getting all the 
> publicity" when posting here?  Is *that* why you
> post so much?

Are you suggesting that I am one of the three who posted the most in 
this most recent thread?

> 
> Sad, if so.
> 
> I was away all weekend, and returned to find Fairfield
> Life having been turned into an intellectual sewer.  I
> was merely commenting on who managed to do that, and
> what their inner motives might have been *for* doing it.
> 
> I didn't notice that this weekend you were one of the 
> three people I was speaking about who managed to make
> the entire newsgroup all about them and their insecurities. 
> But judging by the defensive way you jumped right in here
> and couldn't wait to attack me, maybe you wish you had been.  
> 
> 

I guess I was one of the four, or something. 






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 Commission on 911 Puts "apparently suspicious con...

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Translation: Barry is jealous that Judy got all the publicity
> so now he wants to cash in on it by piggybacking a guest 
> editorial.

"Got all the publicity?"

I was partly joking about the attempt to hijack FFL
and turn it into the cesspool that you guys turned
a.m.t. into, but I guess maybe I was onto something.
Do you *really* think in terms of "getting all the 
publicity" when posting here?  Is *that* why you
post so much?

Sad, if so.

I was away all weekend, and returned to find Fairfield
Life having been turned into an intellectual sewer.  I
was merely commenting on who managed to do that, and
what their inner motives might have been *for* doing it.

I didn't notice that this weekend you were one of the 
three people I was speaking about who managed to make
the entire newsgroup all about them and their insecurities. 
But judging by the defensive way you jumped right in here
and couldn't wait to attack me, maybe you wish you had been.  


> -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  wrote:
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  
> > wrote:
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The Raja of Compton California now declares this thread
> > > > boring and ended!
> > > 
> > > Either that or it should be retitled,
> > > "How three people with out of control egos
> > > hijacked a spiritual group and brought it
> > > down to the level of infantile egobabble."
> > 
> > I think there is a lesson to be learned from
> > the veritable orgy of flatulence that was FFL
> > this weekend.
> > 
> > A few people, with different political leanings
> > but with one thing in common, managed to side-
> > track ALL spiritual discussion on the newsgroup
> > and turn Fairfield Life into a 500+-post demon-
> > stration of, "It's all about US...*WE* are what's 
> > important here!"
> > 
> > The one thing that these three posters have in
> > common?  All three have a history of being a little 
> > light in the loafers in terms of personal, subjective 
> > spiritual experience, and all three have a history of 
> > reacting badly and agressively when people here who 
> > *have* had such experiences choose to report them.
> > 
> > One might suggest that the people who have no exper-
> > iences with higher states of consciousness of their
> > own to talk about, and who have a history of being
> > agressive and skeptical when others talk about them,
> > might subconsciously be wanting to shift the focus of
> > Fairfield Life *AWAY* from such discussions, and 
> > *TOWARDS* discussions that focus on "I am right, you
> > are wrong," "I have no hidden agenda but you have one,"
> > and "I'm smart and you're not." In other words, the 
> > mundane level at which *they* live and operate.
> > 
> > Voila.  A few 500-post slugfests and all that gets
> > talked about is mundane, everyday political bull-
> > shit, and no one is talking about enlightenment
> > any more.
> > 
> > Welcome to the alt.meditation.transcendalization
> > of Fairfield Life.  
> > 
> > :-)  :-)  :-)
> >
>






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 Commission on 911 Puts "apparently suspicious con...

[sparaig]

Translation: Barry is jealous that Judy got all the publicity so now 
he wants to cash in on it by piggybacking a guest editorial.


-- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  
> wrote:
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote:
> > >
> > > The Raja of Compton California now declares this thread
> > > boring and ended!
> > 
> > Either that or it should be retitled,
> > "How three people with out of control egos
> > hijacked a spiritual group and brought it
> > down to the level of infantile egobabble."
> 
> I think there is a lesson to be learned from
> the veritable orgy of flatulence that was FFL
> this weekend.
> 
> A few people, with different political leanings
> but with one thing in common, managed to side-
> track ALL spiritual discussion on the newsgroup
> and turn Fairfield Life into a 500+-post demon-
> stration of, "It's all about US...*WE* are what's 
> important here!"
> 
> The one thing that these three posters have in
> common?  All three have a history of being a little 
> light in the loafers in terms of personal, subjective 
> spiritual experience, and all three have a history of 
> reacting badly and agressively when people here who 
> *have* had such experiences choose to report them.
> 
> One might suggest that the people who have no exper-
> iences with higher states of consciousness of their
> own to talk about, and who have a history of being
> agressive and skeptical when others talk about them,
> might subconsciously be wanting to shift the focus of
> Fairfield Life *AWAY* from such discussions, and 
> *TOWARDS* discussions that focus on "I am right, you
> are wrong," "I have no hidden agenda but you have one,"
> and "I'm smart and you're not." In other words, the 
> mundane level at which *they* live and operate.
> 
> Voila.  A few 500-post slugfests and all that gets
> talked about is mundane, everyday political bull-
> shit, and no one is talking about enlightenment
> any more.
> 
> Welcome to the alt.meditation.transcendalization
> of Fairfield Life.  
> 
> :-)  :-)  :-)
>






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 Commission on 911 Puts "apparently suspicious con...

[jyouells2000]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  
> wrote:
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote:
> > >
> > > The Raja of Compton California now declares this thread
> > > boring and ended!
> > 
> > Either that or it should be retitled,
> > "How three people with out of control egos
> > hijacked a spiritual group and brought it
> > down to the level of infantile egobabble."
> 
> I think there is a lesson to be learned from
> the veritable orgy of flatulence that was FFL
> this weekend.
> 
> A few people, with different political leanings
> but with one thing in common, managed to side-
> track ALL spiritual discussion on the newsgroup
> and turn Fairfield Life into a 500+-post demon-
> stration of, "It's all about US...*WE* are what's 
> important here!"
> 
> The one thing that these three posters have in
> common?  All three have a history of being a little 
> light in the loafers in terms of personal, subjective 
> spiritual experience, and all three have a history of 
> reacting badly and agressively when people here who 
> *have* had such experiences choose to report them.
> 
> One might suggest that the people who have no exper-
> iences with higher states of consciousness of their
> own to talk about, and who have a history of being
> agressive and skeptical when others talk about them,
> might subconsciously be wanting to shift the focus of
> Fairfield Life *AWAY* from such discussions, and 
> *TOWARDS* discussions that focus on "I am right, you
> are wrong," "I have no hidden agenda but you have one,"
> and "I'm smart and you're not." In other words, the 
> mundane level at which *they* live and operate.
> 
> Voila.  A few 500-post slugfests and all that gets
> talked about is mundane, everyday political bull-
> shit, and no one is talking about enlightenment
> any more.
> 
> Welcome to the alt.meditation.transcendalization
> of Fairfield Life.  
> 
> :-)  :-)  :-)
>

Man, you're in for it now :) 
(The diplomatic response might have been, "Yes Dear" LOL, best
chuckle of the day) 


JohnY 

PS. 'orgy of flatulence'... catchy






 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~--> 
Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing
http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM
~-> 

To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 Commission on 911 Puts "apparently suspicious con...

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote:
> >
> > The Raja of Compton California now declares this thread
> > boring and ended!
> 
> Either that or it should be retitled,
> "How three people with out of control egos
> hijacked a spiritual group and brought it
> down to the level of infantile egobabble."

I think there is a lesson to be learned from
the veritable orgy of flatulence that was FFL
this weekend.

A few people, with different political leanings
but with one thing in common, managed to side-
track ALL spiritual discussion on the newsgroup
and turn Fairfield Life into a 500+-post demon-
stration of, "It's all about US...*WE* are what's 
important here!"

The one thing that these three posters have in
common?  All three have a history of being a little 
light in the loafers in terms of personal, subjective 
spiritual experience, and all three have a history of 
reacting badly and agressively when people here who 
*have* had such experiences choose to report them.

One might suggest that the people who have no exper-
iences with higher states of consciousness of their
own to talk about, and who have a history of being
agressive and skeptical when others talk about them,
might subconsciously be wanting to shift the focus of
Fairfield Life *AWAY* from such discussions, and 
*TOWARDS* discussions that focus on "I am right, you
are wrong," "I have no hidden agenda but you have one,"
and "I'm smart and you're not." In other words, the 
mundane level at which *they* live and operate.

Voila.  A few 500-post slugfests and all that gets
talked about is mundane, everyday political bull-
shit, and no one is talking about enlightenment
any more.

Welcome to the alt.meditation.transcendalization
of Fairfield Life.  

:-)  :-)  :-)









 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~--> 
Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing
http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM
~-> 

To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 Commission on 911 Puts "apparently suspicious con...

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote:
> >
> > The Raja of Compton California now declares this thread
> > boring and ended!
> 
> Either that or it should be retitled,
> "How three people with out of control egos
> hijacked a spiritual group and brought it
> down to the level of infantile egobabble."

But I didn't see any posts from you in this thread,
Barry.






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 Commission on 911 Puts "apparently suspicious con...

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> The Raja of Compton California now declares this thread
> boring and ended!

Either that or it should be retitled,
"How three people with out of control egos
hijacked a spiritual group and brought it
down to the level of infantile egobabble."








To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 911 Commission on 911 Puts "apparently suspicious con...

[Bhairitu]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

>The Raja of Compton California  now declares this thread  boring and ended!
>
>  
>
Now that might raise suspicions that he was complicit in 911.



 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~--> 
Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing
http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM
~-> 

To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 Commission on 911 Puts "apparently suspicious consistently proved innocuous"

[shempmcgurk]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anony_sleuth_ff  
> wrote:
> >
> > "These investigators have found that the apparently suspicious
> > consistently proved innocuous."
> 
> Note that *even if* these "innocuous" explanations are
> correct, the investigations were conducted *because*
> there was statistically significant anomalous trading.
> 
> So all your huffing and puffing about statistical
> significance was, as I pointed out repeatedly, a non
> sequitur.
> 
> And Mark Meredith finds the supposed explanations
> unconvincing, so we're back where we started when I
> first brought up the anomalies.



I'd love to hear what Mark says about the hedging...



> 
> If you trust the 9/11 commission, fine, then you can
> rest comfortably in the assumption that all the
> anomalies have been explained.
> 
> But it's quite amusing that you're not demanding to
> see the documentation for *its* conclusions.
>






 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~--> 
Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing
http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM
~-> 

To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 Commission on 911 Puts "apparently suspicious consistently proved innocu

[anony_sleuth_ff]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anony_sleuth_ff  
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anony_sleuth_ff  
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "These investigators have found that the apparently suspicious
> > > > consistently proved innocuous."
> > > 
> > > Note that *even if* these "innocuous" explanations are
> > > correct, the investigations were conducted *because*
> > > there was statistically significant anomalous trading.
> > 
> > Judy, please define for us what YOU think statistical significance
> > actually means.
> 
> Unlikely to have occurred by chance.
> 
> > > So all your huffing and puffing about statistical
> > > significance was, as I pointed out repeatedly, a non
> > > sequitur.
> > 
> > No, not for the points I have been making. It is the point.
> 
> Nope, not the point.  There was never any question
> that the trading was anomalous to a statistically
> significant degree.
> 
> The issue is, and has been from the beginning, your
> attempts to divert the discussion to your straw man
> notwithstanding, the *reasons* for the statistically
> significant anomalous trading.
> 
> The 9/11 commission believes, or says it believes, it
> found the reasons, i.e., they did not occur by chance,
> but there were benign explanations for the anomalies.
> 
> If you trust the 9/11 commission, fine, the whole issue
> has been settled to your satisfaction.


Wow, what a delusional world you live in.







 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~--> 
Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing
http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM
~-> 

To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 911 Commission on 911 Puts "apparently suspicious con...

[MDixon6569]

The Raja of Compton California  now declares this thread 
boring and ended!





To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'








  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Maharishi university of management
  
  
Maharishi mahesh yogi
  
  
Ramana maharshi
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



   Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web. 
   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 Commission on 911 Puts "apparently suspicious consistently proved innocu

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anony_sleuth_ff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anony_sleuth_ff  
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > "These investigators have found that the apparently suspicious
> > > consistently proved innocuous."
> > 
> > Note that *even if* these "innocuous" explanations are
> > correct, the investigations were conducted *because*
> > there was statistically significant anomalous trading.
> 
> Judy, please define for us what YOU think statistical significance
> actually means.

Unlikely to have occurred by chance.

> > So all your huffing and puffing about statistical
> > significance was, as I pointed out repeatedly, a non
> > sequitur.
> 
> No, not for the points I have been making. It is the point.

Nope, not the point.  There was never any question
that the trading was anomalous to a statistically
significant degree.

The issue is, and has been from the beginning, your
attempts to divert the discussion to your straw man
notwithstanding, the *reasons* for the statistically
significant anomalous trading.

The 9/11 commission believes, or says it believes, it
found the reasons, i.e., they did not occur by chance,
but there were benign explanations for the anomalies.

If you trust the 9/11 commission, fine, the whole issue
has been settled to your satisfaction.






 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~--> 
Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing
http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM
~-> 

To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 Commission on 911 Puts "apparently suspicious consistently proved innocu

[anony_sleuth_ff]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anony_sleuth_ff  
> wrote:
> >
> > "These investigators have found that the apparently suspicious
> > consistently proved innocuous."
> 
> Note that *even if* these "innocuous" explanations are
> correct, the investigations were conducted *because*
> there was statistically significant anomalous trading.

Judy, please define for us what YOU think statistical significance
actually means.

> 
> So all your huffing and puffing about statistical
> significance was, as I pointed out repeatedly, a non
> sequitur.

No, not for the points I have been making. It is the point.
 
> And Mark Meredith finds the supposed explanations
> unconvincing, so we're back where we started when I
> first brought up the anomalies. 

Well, if mark finds it uncomnvincing, well, thats an airtught proof.
 
> If you trust the 9/11 commission, fine, then you can
> rest comfortably in the assumption that all the
> anomalies have been explained.
 
> But it's quite amusing that you're not demanding to
> see the documentation for *its* conclusions.
>
I would love to. Do you have links? 


Did you read the full quote?

The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States
(also known as the "9/11 Commission") investigated these rumors and
found that although some unusual (and initially seemingly suspicious)
trading activity did occur in the days prior to September 11, it was
all coincidentally innocuous and not the result of insider trading by
parties with foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks:



"Highly publicized allegations of insider trading in advance of 9/11
generally rest on reports of unusual pre-9/11 trading activity in
companies whose stock plummeted after the attacks. Some unusual
trading did in fact occur, but each such trade proved to have an
innocuous explanation. For example, the volume of put options —
instruments that pay off only when a stock drops in price — surged in
the parent companies of United Airlines on September 6 and American
Airlines on September 10 — highly suspicious trading on its face. Yet,
further investigation has revealed that the trading had no connection
with 9/11. A single U.S.-based institutional investor with no
conceivable ties to al Qaeda purchased 95 percent of the UAL puts on
September 6 as part of a trading strategy that also included buying
115,000 shares of American on September 10. Similarly, much of the
seemingly suspicious trading in American on September 10 was traced to
a specific U.S.-based options trading newsletter, faxed to its
subscribers on Sunday, September 9, which recommended these trades.
The SEC and FBI, aided by other agencies and the securities industry,
devoted enormous resources to investigating this issue, including
securing the cooperation of many foreign governments. These
investigators have found that the apparently suspicious consistently
proved innocuous."






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: 911 Commission on 911 Puts "apparently suspicious consistently proved innocuous"

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anony_sleuth_ff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> "These investigators have found that the apparently suspicious
> consistently proved innocuous."

Note that *even if* these "innocuous" explanations are
correct, the investigations were conducted *because*
there was statistically significant anomalous trading.

So all your huffing and puffing about statistical
significance was, as I pointed out repeatedly, a non
sequitur.

And Mark Meredith finds the supposed explanations
unconvincing, so we're back where we started when I
first brought up the anomalies.

If you trust the 9/11 commission, fine, then you can
rest comfortably in the assumption that all the
anomalies have been explained.

But it's quite amusing that you're not demanding to
see the documentation for *its* conclusions.






 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~--> 
Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing
http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM
~-> 

To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/