Re: [Biofuel] BYU professor's group accuses U.S.officialsoflyingabout 9/11
Gary wrote: Gandhi I've only got a passing familiarity with, even though he seems to be referred to as the father of non-violent protest. Maybe he was perfect and maybe his followers were never incited to riot or to violence. If so, then in this case I'm wrong. I hope I'm wrong. I'd like to be wrong. I wish my cynical world view was wrong and that if you really are pure of heart then the truth will win out in the end and peace will fall on the land but I guess I just haven't seen it in my life time. Get the video of the movie Gandhi and you will learn a lot about him. It's the best movie I ever saw. He forced Britain, the most powerful empire in the world, to leave his country. His protesters never responded with violence, even though the Brits used violence against them. One day the Brits killed hundreds of people, including children, in an enclosed courtyard with no way to escape, yet Gandhi still kept his people nonviolent. Marilyn ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] BYU professor's group accuses U.S.officialsoflyingabout 9/11
On 15 Apr 2006, at 03:14, Keith Addison wrote: Okay, let's take this recent chunk then, from Peter Solem: Today on the University of California, Santa Cruz campus, an organized group of student protestors succeded in shutting down the campus job fair until the military recruiters were forced to leave! [snip] Please apply your thinking to this case. Was it useless? Was it just a riot waiting for an excuse to happen? Was it all a waste of time and effort anyway because it didn't make Page 1 in the NYT and FauxTV didn't run a special? It did make coverage, at least on the net. If something is seen it can be a benefit. If it's not seen it can't. I've never said anything different. How many hundreds of similar incidents have happened worldwide this week? I don't know. None? I hope more than that. But it doesn't matter anyway because they didn't make Page 1 or a FauxTV special either so they might as well not have happened for all the good they did, right? No Keith, those are your words and your interpretation, not mine. Do you agree with all that? You should do, it's what you've been saying. Or will you say it's just an exception that proves the rule or some such similarly specious nonsense? No, I think this is an excellent case that proves that if there is no violence or the threat of violence then nothing gets accomplished. To read the above account of what happened, you would think they were all sitting in a circle peacefully singing Kumbaya and We Will Overcome. Such is not the case. Take a look at the pictures on the net. Look at what was really happening. Look at the ANGRY protesters right in the face of the recruiter. Look at the signs saying Fuck You, yes those words exactly. Look at the other negative messages also. Look at the in- your-face actions of these angry people. People acting in an aggressive manner. I read a report that stones were thrown after the recruiters. Is this non-violent protest? Yes. It is. I'm sure this is just the way it happens many times. Please don't read anything that I've said to say that this is bad. It's not. Protest needs to happen. The recruiters were there to seduce young people to become cannon fodder for an illegal action brought on by a fascist US government. I just believe that there is what we are told, and then there is the way things really are. I don't believe the squeaky clean images of Ghandi, MLK or anyone else. We see the protests, we see the speeches, we don't see the back room discussions and deal making. Meanwhile you're sitting there in your pontificator's armchair suitably buttressed with cushions and comfortable assumptions and telling yourself you're part of the solution not the problem eh? Keith, I really think you are trying to paint me a color I'm not. That comment was a bit mean spirited. Am I part of the problem? Yes, in ways I am. I still burn gasoline in my vehicle. I don't have PV on my house nor do I have wind power generators. I do vote and I try and make correct choices but what good does that do I sometimes wonder. A 12 hour work day is the norm for me, most times longer. My free time is taken up with projects that I'm doing with other companies. I live in a house that is a part of a row of houses and there is not much room for planting things though I'm trying to grow some food rather than all the herbs my wife and bro in law have got planted. I'm facing resistance. When I talk about getting a diesel for our next vehicle I meet with resistance. I'd like to build a nice rammed earth / mudbrick/ strawbale earthship house with PV and wind and everything be recyclable and have it be it's own little ecosystem and have a positive impact on the planet but I'm not there yet. I'm still earning my money for retirement and sending my kid to college. I'm doing it in an economy where the local currency is not very valuable. I'm planning for the future, I'm reading all the posts here and I'm gathering info from the website. I'll get there and have something good to pass onto my daughter or sell to someone else interested in being clean or cleaner. Took me all day to type this between patients. That's all I've got to say this time. Launch the missiles again. Gary ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] BYU professor's group accuses U.S.officialsoflyingabout 9/11
No, I think this is an excellent case that proves that if there is no violence or the threat of violence then nothing gets accomplished. Ahhh.., the old inside every peaceful marcher is a rock-throwing, window-bashing, car-burning, cop-hating anarchist just itching to get out theory. That's enough chuckles for one night, lest I burst a stitch. I really think you are trying to paint me a color I'm not. Well aren't you painting others a color that they aren't, or at least that you don't know they aren't? I'll get there and have something good to pass onto my daughter Hopefully you'll be painting a less dark, although realistic, picture for her along the way as well. Todd Swearingen Gary L. Green wrote: On 15 Apr 2006, at 03:14, Keith Addison wrote: Okay, let's take this recent chunk then, from Peter Solem: Today on the University of California, Santa Cruz campus, an organized group of student protestors succeded in shutting down the campus job fair until the military recruiters were forced to leave! [snip] Please apply your thinking to this case. Was it useless? Was it just a riot waiting for an excuse to happen? Was it all a waste of time and effort anyway because it didn't make Page 1 in the NYT and FauxTV didn't run a special? It did make coverage, at least on the net. If something is seen it can be a benefit. If it's not seen it can't. I've never said anything different. How many hundreds of similar incidents have happened worldwide this week? I don't know. None? I hope more than that. But it doesn't matter anyway because they didn't make Page 1 or a FauxTV special either so they might as well not have happened for all the good they did, right? No Keith, those are your words and your interpretation, not mine. Do you agree with all that? You should do, it's what you've been saying. Or will you say it's just an exception that proves the rule or some such similarly specious nonsense? No, I think this is an excellent case that proves that if there is no violence or the threat of violence then nothing gets accomplished. To read the above account of what happened, you would think they were all sitting in a circle peacefully singing Kumbaya and We Will Overcome. Such is not the case. Take a look at the pictures on the net. Look at what was really happening. Look at the ANGRY protesters right in the face of the recruiter. Look at the signs saying Fuck You, yes those words exactly. Look at the other negative messages also. Look at the in- your-face actions of these angry people. People acting in an aggressive manner. I read a report that stones were thrown after the recruiters. Is this non-violent protest? Yes. It is. I'm sure this is just the way it happens many times. Please don't read anything that I've said to say that this is bad. It's not. Protest needs to happen. The recruiters were there to seduce young people to become cannon fodder for an illegal action brought on by a fascist US government. I just believe that there is what we are told, and then there is the way things really are. I don't believe the squeaky clean images of Ghandi, MLK or anyone else. We see the protests, we see the speeches, we don't see the back room discussions and deal making. Meanwhile you're sitting there in your pontificator's armchair suitably buttressed with cushions and comfortable assumptions and telling yourself you're part of the solution not the problem eh? Keith, I really think you are trying to paint me a color I'm not. That comment was a bit mean spirited. Am I part of the problem? Yes, in ways I am. I still burn gasoline in my vehicle. I don't have PV on my house nor do I have wind power generators. I do vote and I try and make correct choices but what good does that do I sometimes wonder. A 12 hour work day is the norm for me, most times longer. My free time is taken up with projects that I'm doing with other companies. I live in a house that is a part of a row of houses and there is not much room for planting things though I'm trying to grow some food rather than all the herbs my wife and bro in law have got planted. I'm facing resistance. When I talk about getting a diesel for our next vehicle I meet with resistance. I'd like to build a nice rammed earth / mudbrick/ strawbale earthship house with PV and wind and everything be recyclable and have it be it's own little ecosystem and have a positive impact on the planet but I'm not there yet. I'm still earning my money for retirement and sending my kid to college. I'm doing it in an economy where the local currency is not very valuable. I'm planning for the future, I'm reading all the posts here and I'm gathering info from the website. I'll get there and have something good to pass onto my daughter or sell to someone else interested in being
Re: [Biofuel] BYU professor's group accuses U.S.officialsoflyingabout 9/11
Hi Gary, Peaceful protests are seen by folks on the street. So there is a positive effect. The media tends to downgrade the number of protesters if it mentions them at all. If protests get really big, over 100,000 people, I can't see how they can't be covered. If there is police action involved, I doubt that'll get covered correctly. The tendency is to make the protesters the guilty party whether true or not to give the police sympathy. The mainstream media is terribly biased in favor of the officials in every case. So, a protest, because of the media's representation, could well backfire. We have a bunch of Catch-22's here in the U$A. We could make progress in the way of getting a true representative government if: we had a true watchguard media. Except for minor exceptions, we don't. we had real candidates. We do have a few progressives this time around. (need election reform) see: http://www.pdamerica.org/ we had representatives in Congress who valued the common man over corporate interests. With some exceptions, the majority is eager or at least amenable by arm twisting, to do corporate bidding. we had a fired up electorate which continuously harassed their Congress reps. This is growing and may our only hope. Is it at the point of critical ignition? Maybe. It depends on the sensitvity level of our reps. Do they fear not being re-elected enough to do something constructive? we had a reliable voting system. Some states have disavowed use of those touchscreen machines produced by partisan Repug owners. So this is improving. Legislation is in Congress to give us a voting system with reliable audit trail capabilty. Will it be passed in time to get the machines retrofitted in time for the November 2006 elections? I don't know. Since Repugs likely will need machines that could add some needed votes to get them over the top, they'd benefit by dragging their collective feet, something they excell in. There is a groundswell of emotion against the Repugs this time around. Five states are calling for the impeachment of our War President. Getting some progressive liberal Democrats into Congress, enough to give them the Democrats could change things in a hurry. Democrats like Liebermann and Clinton are like clinkers, not good for much. But in any regard, it could be the beginning of the end of corporate controlled Congress. You'd have to say that overall, MLK was a positive agent of change. Riots/fights are just about unavoidable when you have two highly polarized groups. The riots showed that MLK was on the correct path. His speeches were works of spiritual art. He was a pretty brave person, to walk out in front, with highly inflammed people at the side of the parade, who absolutely hated every cell in his body. His assassination was inevitable. The U$A is not at peace with itself. I still hear racial slurs these days. It is sickening. How can people let fear and hate fester on for decades? Peace progress, D. Mindock - Original Message - From: Gary L. Green To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Friday, April 14, 2006 12:25 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] [SPAM] Re: BYU professor's group accuses U.S.officialsoflyingabout 9/11 Okay, let's take this in chunks. Yes, there is peaceful protest but how effective is it really? It's not. It doesn't get much media coverage and gets ignored or forgotten if it is reported. People Power in the PI? Again the threat of violence was there, there were isolated incidents if I remember correctly. Where MLK went there were often riots, big or small okay, small riot is an oxymoron but you get the idea. MLK spoke constantly of non-violence but there were the agitators in the back that kept things on edge. Did MLK secretly coordinate with them? Who knows. All I'm saying here is without the iron fist inside the silk glove you won't be taken seriously. Sorry if it appears I'm stomping on one of your heros but I see very few people as saints be they good or bad. Politics are everywhere no matter what your agenda be it for good or bad. Someone once said that if you were not into politics, you will be done in by politics. On 14 Apr 2006, at 10:20, Keith Addison wrote: Whenever MLK came to town you knew you either gave him what he wanted or you would have violence on your hands. The man was not a saint but he was very good at what he did. That's why he had to be killed. And so that proves your point, there's no such thing as peaceful protest, it's just a sham? Why not answer the rest of the question Gary? It went like this: ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages):
Re: [Biofuel] BYU professor's group accuses U.S.officialsoflyingabout 9/11
Hi Gary, Two Kennedys were killed. Bobby was a fiery politician who would've shaken things up too much. Some member(s) of the shadow gov decided he couldn't become prez. He was well on his way when Sirhan Sirhan shot him in California. I had seen Bobby speak at the Univ of Washington, Seattle, just prior to that. There was electric energy in the air. I tried to shake his hand after the speech but only managed touching his left back shoulder. He would have easily gotten into the WH. Peace, D. Mindock - Original Message - From: Gary L. Green [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Friday, April 14, 2006 1:19 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] [SPAM] Re: [SPAM] Re: BYU professor's group accuses U.S.officialsoflyingabout 9/11 On 14 Apr 2006, at 11:05, Appal Energy wrote: Whenever MLK came to town you knew you either gave him what he wanted or you would have violence on your hands. Violence at who's initiation? snip Something about having a foot in the middle of your back just doesn't cotton too well towards the idea of peace. Exactly. I'm saying he didn't lead a band of trained peace protesters, there were those but not all. The majority were regular folk, of whatever race, that were pissed that things were the way they were and if they didn't see things progressing they were prone to display their displeasure. When I read about MLK, I also read about unrest. That's why he had to be killed. Excuse me? Advocating equality is justification for murder? Let me guess..., I misunderstand what you wrote. Todd Swearingen Maybe. He was a proponent for change, for equality. In the great scheme of U.S. empire building that comes contrary to profit. I'm saying the same people that had Kennedy killed had MLK killed. Justified? I never said that. I didn't say he should die. I said that the powers that be were not about to leave him alive. Gary ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] BYU professor's group accuses U.S.officialsoflyingabout 9/11
Yo Gary, I think your idea of totally peaceful revolution is nice butunrealistic. Clashes of people who have opposite strivings are inevitable. Thoughtslead toemotion which in turn action.. Opposite thinking leads to oppossing emotions which easily can lead to fights. Mobs can be incited to do terrible things. I seriously doubt if Ghandi wanted fights but he was realistic enough to know they could happen. He was a social activist trying best he could to get the British out of Indian lives and did not want bloodshed. What does it mean to be perfect? Ibelieve action that follows from true thinking is "perfect". Maybe you think Ghandi should have just stayed in a cave and meditated? Would that make him perfect? Not imo, he would be throwing away hisheartfelt need to make India free. He had to be true to himself. I think there are many parallels between MLK and Ghandi. They both faught oppression in the most peaceful way they knew. It was the oppressors who tried to break their will. Large social changes like they were trying to realize cause a wave of fear to move through those that impose the status quo. These people always have their fringe element who feel called to restore order in the only way they know, brute violence. Both Ghandi and MLK knew the huge personal risk they were taking but refused to back away. They are rightly called heroes of humanity and peace. Peace, D. Mindock - Original Message - From: Gary L. Green To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Friday, April 14, 2006 1:02 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] [SPAM] Re: BYU professor's group accuses U.S.officialsoflyingabout 9/11 Gandhi I've only got a passing familiarity with, even though he seems to bereferred to as the father of non-violent protest. Maybe he was perfect and maybe his followers were never incited to riot or to violence. If so, then in this case I'm wrong. I hope I'm wrong. I'd like to be wrong. I wish my cynical world view was wrong and that if you really are pure of heart then the truth will win out in the end and peace will fall on the land but I guess I just haven't seen it in my life time. On 14 Apr 2006, at 10:20, Keith Addison wrote: ask: what would Martin Luther King Jr or Ghandi do? Who would Jesus bomb? The moneylenders in the temple? "Peaceful Protest" always had the promise of riots behind it. I don't think so. So what about Gandhi? And indeed Jesus? Let's have a look at the global protests since Seattle in 1999, what about them? I see lots on violence on the TV where protests are going on. Where are the peaceful ones? I'm serious. Educate me. Maybe I'm turning blinders to peace because it seems to me that all there is, is evil and violence in the world at large. Little people being crushed under the wheel of US empire building and Globalization monster. This Jesus guy though. The more I read about the true, historical Jesus he is looking less and less like the guy in theWholly Roman Bible and more like an Iraqi insurgent. He was closely associated with the Zealots who were fighting against the Roman occupation. When his plans of politicalascensionfell apart, looks like he high tailed it out of there and maybe joined Mary Mag in France. Keith, educate me. Where am I wrong? ___Biofuel mailing listBiofuel@sustainablelists.orghttp://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.orgBiofuel at Journey to Forever:http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.htmlSearch the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages):http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] BYU professor's group accuses U.S.officialsoflyingabout 9/11
Okay, let's take this in chunks. Not okay: Why not answer the rest of the question Gary? It went like this: snippetysnippetysnip... Snipping's supposed to remove previous irrelevant matter to save space. But you're a compulsive snipper, and not to save space. Then the chunks you're left with aren't quite the same thing, eh? You can just take a little nibble or two in order to spit it out again and leave all the rest snipped by the wayside. It just evades the issue, and among other things somehow leads you to conclude that you're knocking one of my heroes, for heavens sakes. Do you think King Asoka's my hero too? We're not talking about hero-worship. Why don't you try giving a proper response? I'm not going to stitch it all back again, do it yourself. Who said anything about saints? Only you. Who's trying to avoid politics other than you? And who are you trying to tell about media coverage? If you'd been paying a little more attention you might have learnt a little about just what media coverage means and doesn't mean and the role it plays and doesn't play in issues such as these. Not necessarily what you just naturally assume. You have to skip over (snip snip) large chunks (not just niblets) of recent and current history for your view of it to make any sense. It's just prejudice anyway (pre-judgment). Force reality into it if you wish, but you're not persuading anyone but yourself that it fits. Peaceful protest doesn't work, what a load of old bullshit, same with peace with justice doesn't exist. You're talking nonsense. Gandhi I've only got a passing familiarity with, even though he seems to be referred to as the father of non-violent protest. Maybe he was perfect and maybe his followers were never incited to riot or to violence. If so, then in this case I'm wrong. I hope I'm wrong. I'd like to be wrong. I wish my cynical world view was wrong and that if you really are pure of heart then the truth will win out in the end and peace will fall on the land but I guess I just haven't seen it in my life time. There's a difference between cynicism and that last little burst of sarcasm, and cynicism isn't usually so ill-informed either. Maybe you didn't see it because you didn't look or looked the other way? Go and study Gandhi then, you're not qualified to discuss this issue if you know nothing about Gandhi, let alone declaim on it. You share a country with a lot of Indians among others and you don't know from Gandhi? Or from the history of the last 40 years it seems, other than via a keyhole. If you found just one instance of riot or violence being associated with Gandhian protest you'd look no further, that'd be your proof, case rests. Poof, you snap your fingers, and the role of peaceful protest and passive resistance in creating change vanishes, and so today, at this of all crucial junctures in human affairs, you'd leave us with no other tools than a hammer to face a juggernaut. I think you don't really know anything about this. Probably that's what other people said about King at the time and you've thought so ever since. Also please don't just brush things aside. Eg: Peace with justice, D. Mindock Did that ever really exist? You were given some examples, snipping it isn't exactly an acceptable response. Keith Addison Journey to Forever KYOTO Pref., Japan http://journeytoforever.org/ Biofuel list owner Okay, let's take this in chunks. Yes, there is peaceful protest but how effective is it really? It's not. It doesn't get much media coverage and gets ignored or forgotten if it is reported. People Power in the PI? Again the threat of violence was there, there were isolated incidents if I remember correctly. Where MLK went there were often riots, big or small okay, small riot is an oxymoron but you get the idea. MLK spoke constantly of non-violence but there were the agitators in the back that kept things on edge. Did MLK secretly coordinate with them? Who knows. All I'm saying here is without the iron fist inside the silk glove you won't be taken seriously. Sorry if it appears I'm stomping on one of your heros but I see very few people as saints be they good or bad. Politics are everywhere no matter what your agenda be it for good or bad. Someone once said that if you were not into politics, you will be done in by politics. On 14 Apr 2006, at 10:20, Keith Addison wrote: Whenever MLK came to town you knew you either gave him what he wanted or you would have violence on your hands. The man was not a saint but he was very good at what he did. That's why he had to be killed. And so that proves your point, there's no such thing as peaceful protest, it's just a sham? Why not answer the rest of the question Gary? It went like this: ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at
Re: [Biofuel] BYU professor's group accuses U.S.officialsoflyingabout 9/11
I have to agreethat social change does not happen with peaceful protests. The people benefiting from the imbalance that causes peaceful protests won't let go so easily (especially when they pay someone to fight their battles).The fight ends up being between the only two forms of power that mean anythingin our society - money and people.When individuals believe they should have more than most, they accumulate wealth and with it, power. Those who are effected by that power and are not wealthy, organize and gather consensus among their fellow citizens.(IMO) the violence starts when the two powers have had time (years) to build. Peaceful protests are a tell-tale, signaling the possibility of violence. The conflict won't end untilantagonists (ruling class)havebecome exhausted from the fight and it's clear that there isn't much (money) left to gain by continuing. The reason for such an imbalance can't be placed squarely on the shoulders of the narcissists who gather wealth for the purpose of projecting power. If citizens played a bigger role in the everyday business of government, the imbalance would be seen earlier and kept from becoming the threat that it is today....my $.02MikeKeith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Okay, let's take this in chunks.Not okay:Why not answer the rest of the question Gary? It went like this:snippetysnippetysnip...Snipping's supposed to remove previous irrelevant matter to save space. But you're a compulsive snipper, and not to save space. Then the "chunks" you're left with aren't quite the same thing, eh? You can just take a little nibble or two in order to spit it out again and leave all the rest snipped by the wayside.It just evades the issue, and among other things somehow leads you to conclude that you're knocking one of my heroes, for heavens sakes. Do you think King Asoka's my hero too? We're not talking about hero-worship.Why don't you try giving a proper response? I'm not going to stitch it all back again, do it yourself.Who said anything about saints? Only you. Who's trying to avoid politics other than you? And who are you trying to tell about media coverage? If you'd been paying a little more attention you might have learnt a little about just what media coverage means and doesn't mean and the role it plays and doesn't play in issues such as these. Not necessarily what you just naturally assume.You have to skip over (snip snip) large chunks (not just niblets) of recent and current history for your view of it to make any sense. It's just prejudice anyway (pre-judgment). Force reality into it if you wish, but you're not persuading anyone but yourself that it fits.Peaceful protest doesn't work, what a load of old bullshit, same with peace with justice doesn't exist. You're talking nonsense.Gandhi I've only got a passing familiarity with, even though he seems to be referred to as the father of non-violent protest.Maybe he was perfect and maybe his followers were never incited to riot or to violence. If so, then in this case I'm wrong. I hope I'm wrong. I'd like to be wrong. I wish my cynical world view was wrong and that if you really are pure of heart then the truth will win out in the end and peace will fall on the land but I guess I just haven't seen it in my life time.There's a difference between cynicism and that last little burst of sarcasm, and cynicism isn't usually so ill-informed either. Maybe you didn't see it because you didn't look or looked the other way?Go and study Gandhi then, you're not qualified to discuss this issue if you know nothing about Gandhi, let alone declaim on it. You share a country with a lot of Indians among others and you don't know from Gandhi? Or from the history of the last 40 years it seems, other than via a keyhole. If you found just one instance of riot or violence being associated with Gandhian protest you'd look no further, that'd be your proof, case rests. Poof, you snap your fingers, and the role of peaceful protest and passive resistance in creating change vanishes, and so today, at this of all crucial junctures in human affairs, you'd leave us with no other tools than a hammer to face a juggernaut.I think you don't really know anything about this. Probably that's what other people said about King at the time and you've thought so ever since.Also please don't just brush things aside. Eg:Peace with justice, D. MindockDid that ever really exist?You were given some examples, snipping it isn't exactly an acceptable response.Keith AddisonJourney to ForeverKYOTO Pref., Japanhttp://journeytoforever.org/Biofuel list owner[snip]___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] BYU professor's group accuses U.S.officialsoflyingabout 9/11
I was in New York City on the second anniversary of the invasion in Iraq. There was a sea of people that stretched for as far as one could see. The estimates were around 80,000.80,000loud and angry protestors and it barely made the news!Mike"D. Mindock" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Gary,Peaceful protests are seen by folks on the street. So there is a positive effect. The media tends to downgrade the number ofprotesters if it mentions them at all. If protests get really big, over 100,000 people, I can't seehow they can't be covered. If there is police action involved, I doubt that'll get covered correctly.The tendency is to make the protesters the guilty party whether true or not to give the policesympathy. The mainstream media is terribly biased in favor of the officials in every case. So, aprotest, because of the media's representation, could well backfire.We have a bunch of Catch-22's here in the U$A. We could make progress in the way of gettinga true representative government if:we had a true watchguard media. Except for minor exceptions,we don't.we had real candidates. We do have a few progressives this time around. (need election reform)see: http://www.pdamerica.org/we had representatives in Congress who valued the common man over corporate interests. Withsome exceptions, the majority is eager or at least amenable by arm twisting, to do corporate bidding.we had a fired up electorate which continuously harassed their Congress reps. This is growingand may our only hope. Is it at the point of critical ignition? Maybe. It depends on the sensitvitylevel of our reps. Do they fear not being re-elected enough to do something constructive?we had a reliable voting system. Some states have disavowed use of those touchscreen machinesproduced by partisan Repug owners. So this is improving. Legislation is in Congress to give us avoting system with reliable audit trail capabilty. Will it be passed in time to get the machinesretrofitted in time for the November 2006 elections? I don't know. Since Repugs likely will needmachines that could add some needed votes to get them over the top, they'd benefit by draggingtheir collective feet, something they excell in.There is a groundswell of emotion against the Repugs this time around. Five states are calling for theimpeachment of our War President. Getting some progressiveliberal Democrats into Congress, enough to give them the Democrats could change things in a hurry.Democrats like Liebermann and Clinton are like clinkers, not good for much. But in any regard,it could be the beginning of the end of corporate controlled Congress.You'd have to say that overall, MLK was a positive agent of change. Riots/fights are just about unavoidablewhen you have two highly polarized groups. The riots showed that MLK was on the correct path.His speeches were works of spiritual art.He was a pretty brave person, to walk out in front, with highly inflammed people at the side of the parade, whoabsolutely hated every cell in his body. His assassination was inevitable. The U$A is not at peace withitself. I still hear racial slurs these days. It is sickening. How can people let fear and hate fester on fordecades?Peace progress, D. Mindock[snip]___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] BYU professor's group accuses U.S.officialsoflyingabout 9/11
I have to agree that social change does not happen with peaceful protests. Social change does not ONLY happen with peaceful protest. And peaceful protest does most certainly happen. The people benefiting from the imbalance that causes peaceful protests won't let go so easily (especially when they pay someone to fight their battles). The fight ends up being between the only two forms of power that mean anything in our society - money and people. When individuals believe they should have more than most, they accumulate wealth and with it, power. Those who are effected by that power and are not wealthy, organize and gather consensus among their fellow citizens. (IMO) the violence starts when the two powers have had time (years) to build. Peaceful protests are a tell-tale, signaling the possibility of violence. They signal the failure of the system to deliver on its promises, so alternative means must be found of bringing public opinion to bear on public events, and peaceful protest is one of them. The conflict won't end until antagonists (ruling class) have become exhausted from the fight and it's clear that there isn't much (money) left to gain by continuing. That's how it's been in the past, but despite all the apparently lost battles what history shows nonetheless is a steady pushing forward of the frontiers of human rights. That all the battles of the past have been lost (they weren't) wouldn't necessarily mean that the next one will be the same, especially not when there are some really new factors in the mix, which there are. The whole long 10,000-year war could be won or lost now, not just a battle. The reason for such an imbalance can't be placed squarely on the shoulders of the narcissists who gather wealth for the purpose of projecting power. If citizens played a bigger role in the everyday business of government, the imbalance would be seen earlier and kept from becoming the threat that it is today. Why do they consent to leaving it all to the government and the authorities in the first place? That's just what Edward Bernays said he invented public relations to achieve after all. Best Keith ...my $.02 Mike Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Okay, let's take this in chunks. Not okay: Why not answer the rest of the question Gary? It went like this: snippetysnippetysnip... Snipping's supposed to remove previous irrelevant matter to save space. But you're a compulsive snipper, and not to save space. Then the chunks you're left with aren't quite the same thing, eh? You can just take a little nibble or two in order to spit it out again and leave all the rest snipped by the wayside. It just evades the issue, and among other things somehow leads you to conclude that you're knocking one of my heroes, for heavens sakes. Do you think King Asoka's my hero too? We're not talking about hero-worship. Why don't you try giving a proper response? I'm not going to stitch it all back again, do it yourself. Who said anything about saints? Only you. Who's trying to avoid politics other than you? And who are you trying to tell about media coverage? If you'd been paying a little more attention you might have learnt a little about just what media coverage means and doesn't mean and the role it plays and doesn't play in issues such as these. Not necessarily what you just naturally assume. You have to skip over (snip snip) large chunks (not just niblets) of recent and current history for your view of it to make any sense. It's just prejudice anyway (pre-judgment). Force reality into it if you wish, but you're not persuading anyone but yourself that it fits. Peaceful protest doesn't work, what a load of old bullshit, same with peace with justice doesn't exist. You're talking nonsense. Gandhi I've only got a passing familiarity with, even though he seems to be referred to as the father of non-violent protest. Maybe he was perfect and maybe his followers were never incited to riot or to violence. If so, then in this case I'm wrong. I hope I'm wrong. I'd like to be wrong. I wish my cynical world view was wrong and that if you really are pure of heart then the truth will win out in the end and peace will fall on the land but I guess I just haven't seen it in my life time. There's a difference between cynicism and that last little burst of sarcasm, and cynicism isn't usually so ill-informed either. Maybe you didn't see it because you didn't look or looked the other way? Go and study Gandhi then, you're not qualified to discuss this issue if you know nothing about Gandhi, let alone declaim on it. You share a country with a lot of Indians among others and you don't know from Gandhi? Or from the history of the last 40 years it seems, other than via a keyhole. If you found just one instance of riot or violence being associated with Gandhian protest you'd look no further, that'd be your proof, case rests. Poof, you snap your fingers, and the role of peaceful protest
Re: [Biofuel] BYU professor's group accuses U.S.officialsoflyingabout 9/11
Keith Addison wrote: Okay, let's take this in chunks. Not okay: Why not answer the rest of the question Gary? It went like this: snippetysnippetysnip... Snipping's supposed to remove previous irrelevant matter to save space. But you're a compulsive snipper, and not to save space. Then the chunks you're left with aren't quite the same thing, eh? You know, I never really belived this until now. I've always used snipping to keep the space down. I keep things I will comment upon, and snip out the stuff I am unable/unwilling/can't comment on. Usually, if I concurr with my debating opponents point, I make note of that. It never occured to me to use snipping as editorial re-wording, in order to twist the debate back into a structure that more fits my point of view. That's intellectually dishonest. I'll certainly watch for that in the future. ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] BYU professor's group accuses U.S.officialsoflyingabout 9/11
Keith,Thanks for correcting my sentence, missing the word "only". Yep, peaceful protests do happen and I didn't articulate that very clearly. Kinda funny since I participate in them from time to time.MikeKeith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:I have to agree that social change does not happen with peaceful protests.Social change does not ONLY happen with peaceful protest. And peaceful protest does most certainly happen.The people benefiting from the imbalance that causes peaceful protests won't let go so easily (especially when they pay someone to fight their battles).The fight ends up being between the only two forms of power that mean anything in our society - money and people. When individuals believe they should have more than most, they accumulate wealth and with it, power. Those who are effected by that power and are not wealthy, organize and gather consensus among their fellow citizens.(IMO) the violence starts when the two powers have had time (years) to build. Peaceful protests are a tell-tale, signaling the possibility of violence.They signal the failure of the system to deliver on its promises, so alternative means must be found of bringing public opinion to bear on public events, and peaceful protest is one of them.The conflict won't end until antagonists (ruling class) have become exhausted from the fight and it's clear that there isn't much (money) left to gain by continuing.That's how it's been in the past, but despite all the apparently lost battles what history shows nonetheless is a steady pushing forward of the frontiers of human rights. That all the battles of the past have been lost (they weren't) wouldn't necessarily mean that the next one will be the same, especially not when there are some really new factors in the mix, which there are. The whole long 10,000-year war could be won or lost now, not just a battle.The reason for such an imbalance can't be placed squarely on the shoulders of the narcissists who gather wealth for the purpose of projecting power. If citizens played a bigger role in the everyday business of government, the imbalance would be seen earlier and kept from becoming the threat that it is today.Why do they consent to leaving it all to the government and the authorities in the first place? That's just what Edward Bernays said he invented public relations to achieve after all.BestKeith...my $.02Mike [snip]___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] BYU professor's group accuses U.S.officialsoflyingabout 9/11
Gary Okay, let's take this in chunks. Okay, let's take this recent chunk then, from Peter Solem: Today on the University of California, Santa Cruz campus, an organized group of student protestors succeded in shutting down the campus job fair until the military recruiters were forced to leave! One student who was taking photos of police surveillance officers was arrested, but the students surrounded the building he was in and eventually the student was released, apparently without charges. This is just a little thing in practical terms, but a huge thing in symbolic terms. If we keep it up, Bush won't dare bomb Iran (we hope). Waking up is a reality! http://snipurl.com/p780 [Biofuel] [Fwd: [IP] Is the US preparing to bomb Iran?] Tue Apr 11 2006 Please apply your thinking to this case. Was it useless? Was it just a riot waiting for an excuse to happen? Was it all a waste of time and effort anyway because it didn't make Page 1 in the NYT and FauxTV didn't run a special? How many hundreds of similar incidents have happened worldwide this week? But it doesn't matter anyway because they didn't make Page 1 or a FauxTV special either so they might as well not have happened for all the good they did, right? Do you agree with all that? You should do, it's what you've been saying. Or will you say it's just an exception that proves the rule or some such similarly specious nonsense? Meanwhile you're sitting there in your pontificator's armchair suitably buttressed with cushions and comfortable assumptions and telling yourself you're part of the solution not the problem eh? Keith Not okay: Why not answer the rest of the question Gary? It went like this: snippetysnippetysnip... Snipping's supposed to remove previous irrelevant matter to save space. But you're a compulsive snipper, and not to save space. Then the chunks you're left with aren't quite the same thing, eh? You can just take a little nibble or two in order to spit it out again and leave all the rest snipped by the wayside. It just evades the issue, and among other things somehow leads you to conclude that you're knocking one of my heroes, for heavens sakes. Do you think King Asoka's my hero too? We're not talking about hero-worship. Why don't you try giving a proper response? I'm not going to stitch it all back again, do it yourself. Who said anything about saints? Only you. Who's trying to avoid politics other than you? And who are you trying to tell about media coverage? If you'd been paying a little more attention you might have learnt a little about just what media coverage means and doesn't mean and the role it plays and doesn't play in issues such as these. Not necessarily what you just naturally assume. You have to skip over (snip snip) large chunks (not just niblets) of recent and current history for your view of it to make any sense. It's just prejudice anyway (pre-judgment). Force reality into it if you wish, but you're not persuading anyone but yourself that it fits. Peaceful protest doesn't work, what a load of old bullshit, same with peace with justice doesn't exist. You're talking nonsense. Gandhi I've only got a passing familiarity with, even though he seems to be referred to as the father of non-violent protest. Maybe he was perfect and maybe his followers were never incited to riot or to violence. If so, then in this case I'm wrong. I hope I'm wrong. I'd like to be wrong. I wish my cynical world view was wrong and that if you really are pure of heart then the truth will win out in the end and peace will fall on the land but I guess I just haven't seen it in my life time. There's a difference between cynicism and that last little burst of sarcasm, and cynicism isn't usually so ill-informed either. Maybe you didn't see it because you didn't look or looked the other way? Go and study Gandhi then, you're not qualified to discuss this issue if you know nothing about Gandhi, let alone declaim on it. You share a country with a lot of Indians among others and you don't know from Gandhi? Or from the history of the last 40 years it seems, other than via a keyhole. If you found just one instance of riot or violence being associated with Gandhian protest you'd look no further, that'd be your proof, case rests. Poof, you snap your fingers, and the role of peaceful protest and passive resistance in creating change vanishes, and so today, at this of all crucial junctures in human affairs, you'd leave us with no other tools than a hammer to face a juggernaut. I think you don't really know anything about this. Probably that's what other people said about King at the time and you've thought so ever since. Also please don't just brush things aside. Eg: Peace with justice, D. Mindock Did that ever really exist? You were given some examples, snipping it isn't exactly an acceptable response. Keith Addison Journey to Forever KYOTO Pref., Japan http://journeytoforever.org/ Biofuel list owner Okay,
Re: [Biofuel] BYU professor's group accuses U.S.officialsoflyingabout 9/11
On 13 Apr 2006, at 10:18, D. Mindock wrote: A revolution is what we need here. Peaceful, of course. Well, that won't happen. Would somebody PLEASE get me my orbiting nuke platform? I need to make some changes here. I guess we need to ask: what would Martin Luther King Jr or Ghandi do? Who would Jesus bomb? The moneylenders in the temple? Peaceful Protest always had the promise of riots behind it. I don't think so. It's always a possibility, but with exceptions the protestors don't seek it, when they say it's a peaceful protest they usually mean it and try hard to prevent it becoming anything else. Violence is often deliberately provoked, often by plants in the crowd, or you just get attacked or shot anyway without any of the niceties. If there's such a promise it might not be the protestors who make it. Peace with justice, D. Mindock Did that ever really exist? 29. King Asoka. Wells, H.G. 1922. A Short History of the World http://www.bartleby.com/86/29.html 21. A Kingdom of Agricultural Art in Europe, Reconstruction by Way of the Soil, G. T. Wrench, 1946 http://journeytoforever.org/farm_library/Wrench_Recon/Wrench_Recon_21.html 22. An Historical Reconstruction, Reconstruction by Way of the Soil, G. T. Wrench, 1946 http://journeytoforever.org/farm_library/Wrench_Recon/Wrench_Recon_22.html There are others. Anyway, did peace with justice ever not exist? They exist all the time, maybe in most places most of the time. But you mean on the level of societies, nation states, empires, globally. There are good examples, and they may represent the human norm more than the score-tag of history might indicate - maybe it's what we naturally do if only we can solve the problem of power which has oppressed us for the last 10,000 years and more. We do often solve it, in our communities and beyond. Power is probably a problem of scale, beyond which human affairs cease to be strictly human. History is the tale of the powerful. We'll see about the future. The obstacles to peace and justice are easy to see, especially these days. It's not something to be sceptical about, it's something to insist on. Great kings is what it took. Now all it needs is the Internet. IMHO. Best Keith ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] BYU professor's group accuses U.S.officialsoflyingabout 9/11
Whenever MLK came to town you knew you either gave him what he wanted or you would have violence on your hands. The man was not a saint but he was very good at what he did. That's why he had to be killed. And so that proves your point, there's no such thing as peaceful protest, it's just a sham? Why not answer the rest of the question Gary? It went like this: I guess we need to ask: what would Martin Luther King Jr or Ghandi do? Who would Jesus bomb? The moneylenders in the temple? Peaceful Protest always had the promise of riots behind it. I don't think so. So what about Gandhi? And indeed Jesus? Let's have a look at the global protests since Seattle in 1999, what about them? On 14Apr, 2006, at 4:41 AM, Keith Addison wrote: Peaceful Protest always had the promise of riots behind it. I don't think so. I In fact why not answer the rest of the post, just for a change? Here it is: I guess we need to ask: what would Martin Luther King Jr or Ghandi do? Who would Jesus bomb? The moneylenders in the temple? Peaceful Protest always had the promise of riots behind it. I don't think so. It's always a possibility, but with exceptions the protestors don't seek it, when they say it's a peaceful protest they usually mean it and try hard to prevent it becoming anything else. Violence is often deliberately provoked, often by plants in the crowd, or you just get attacked or shot anyway without any of the niceties. If there's such a promise it might not be the protestors who make it. Peace with justice, D. Mindock Did that ever really exist? 29. King Asoka. Wells, H.G. 1922. A Short History of the World http://www.bartleby.com/86/29.html 21. A Kingdom of Agricultural Art in Europe, Reconstruction by Way of the Soil, G. T. Wrench, 1946 http://journeytoforever.org/farm_library/Wrench_Recon/Wrench_Recon_21.html 22. An Historical Reconstruction, Reconstruction by Way of the Soil, G. T. Wrench, 1946 http://journeytoforever.org/farm_library/Wrench_Recon/Wrench_Recon_22.html There are others. Anyway, did peace with justice ever not exist? They exist all the time, maybe in most places most of the time. But you mean on the level of societies, nation states, empires, globally. There are good examples, and they may represent the human norm more than the score-tag of history might indicate - maybe it's what we naturally do if only we can solve the problem of power which has oppressed us for the last 10,000 years and more. We do often solve it, in our communities and beyond. Power is probably a problem of scale, beyond which human affairs cease to be strictly human. History is the tale of the powerful. We'll see about the future. The obstacles to peace and justice are easy to see, especially these days. It's not something to be sceptical about, it's something to insist on. Great kings is what it took. Now all it needs is the Internet. IMHO. Best Keith ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] BYU professor's group accuses U.S.officialsoflyingabout 9/11
Paul, D. I'm not being a naysayer, the conspiracy theory may have legs, but all this creates many more questions for me...Reasonable doubt is exactly what they would want to create All this is circumstantial and we need hard evidence. Witnesses. Got the witnesses, lots of them. Receipts. Black boxes. Presidential briefings. VICE Presidential briefings. Lewis Libby really, really drunk. This was a black operation, likely the CIA. So loose evidence like receipts, video tapes, and photos will not be found. If an agent, whether fed. or not, involved would get a case of conscience and came forward, it'd help a lot. But that's unlikely since the agent's life, his family, etc., would be in dire jeopardy. For the WTC Towers and #7 to be wired for explosives would be a HUGE project requiring a LOT of time and workers in those buildings for weeks. Where are those workers? If you watched Loose Change carefully, you'd know the answers. Where is the company that carried it out? There are only a few skyscraper demo companies. No one saw them? From whom did they order the wire? Who drove the truck? Loose Change covers this fairly well. Marvin Bush was involved. I saw a show on the Discovery Channel about why the towers fell and they had a lot of footage of engineers studying the steel in the special yard it was taken to in New Jersey. There was a HUGE operation 24/7 sifting through the rubble finding personal effects and bone/tissue fragments. The engineers and architects investigating why they fell had cut out huge pieces of steel and had them in their offices. The conclusion of the TV show was that the insulation covering the steel was blown off by the impact and explosion of the airplanes, and caused the buckling of the steel. The gov has lots of scientists in its grasp. (So does Big Pharma.) I can't find a summary of the TV show, but here is the featured MIT guy with good explanation: http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html And a transcript of his NOVA interview: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/collapse2.html No, mention of WTC7...FEMA surely bumbled the investigation and it did fall precisely. My guess is that the 'earthquake' following the WTC towers collapse weakened the building and the fire fueled by diesel caused buckling in the middle of the building, but there is not enough reliable evidence to make a determination. An earthquake causes only Bldg 7 to fall, and to fall in that very orderly fashion. So convenient. The 9/11 Commission could have used that idea. Instead they just ignored Bldg 7. BTW, where did the diesel fuel come from? I can't remember the exact quote, but there is no need to attribute to evil what can adequately be explained by stupidity. I think the quote is not a good fit at all. There was a huge overabundance of stupidity on 9/11? Nope, it was tradgedy that happened with the assistance of the gov, military top brass, NSA, CIA, and FBI. One day we will know the truth...Hopefully one day it will all add up. How much more do we need? The 9/11 Commission was a farce to whitewash the whole affair. The victim's families had to lobby the gov for over a year before it relunctantly investigated. If 9/11 was a real act of terrorism, don't you think that BushCo would have jumped right on it and not had to be dragged, feet kicking, to find out what really happened? What we need now is a truly independent investigation by real scientists, unbiased people with impeccable credentials, to do a real study of 9/11. I doubt that the Repugs in Congress would allow it. They are a big part of the problem in the first place. They are used to the high living, fat cat, way of life. IMO, until we get publicly financed elections here in the U$A, we will continue to get nimwits who are eager to do corporate bidding. To run for office now costs tens of millions of dollars and Big Biz has the deep pockets, eagerness, to back the candidates of their choice. So we desperately need election reform here, something that Big Biz will fight, since they relish control. I think bottom line is that we have a deadly binary pairing: greed and greed fulfillment. Big Biz's is the willing agent to satiate that greed. Greed makes grown men, highly principled, to slowly slide down that slope into the money pot below. A revolution is what we need here. Peaceful, of course. I guess we need to ask: what would Martin Luther King Jr or Ghandi do? Peace with justice, D. Mindock On 4/10/06, D. Mindock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Check out: http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/jones/StevenJones.html Basically the planes were not enough to do the collapse alone. They needed help. WRT having to have the planes hit at the exact level where there would be charges, not necessary. The upper few stories wouldn't need any but maybe they were there, just in case. Just put the charges at all the floors below. Demolition wiring is
Re: [Biofuel] BYU professor's group accuses U.S.officialsoflyingabout 9/11
Mike, To me the case has been there all along, just needsa "tower of strength" to take it on with international news coverage and Jtf. The case was there for Ike, but all slept on and paid the $36M to Sloan and Co. in Berlin. Why do we let history repeat,our heritage has not been Peace, Harmony, Empathyand stability but wars and aggressionfrom the beginning of eternity even in the much worshippedsports areanas. See also the "secret war" under its modern name Staring Mel Gibson as a pilot and trafficker, was war ever declared? Thousands of US and other civilians died, and still are being killed/maimed today by the remnants,in the most heavily bombed country of the world,where war was not declared. Is this not criminal enough? If found guilty would this mean the seizure of all assets of the families? This is so in Aus with drug dealers. Doug - Original Message - From: Michael Redler To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2006 11:13 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] BYU professor's group accuses U.S.officialsoflyingabout 9/11 "All this is circumstantial and we need hard evidence." The prosecution of a suspected criminal involves (among other things) finding motive, means, opportunity and a pattern of behavioror modus operandi. The video made a compelling case for quantifying what the US government iscapable of. They did this with events from the past whichcan be found in US State department documents (i.e. Operation North Woods). see also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_operations_and_projects_(military_and_non-military) MikePaul S Cantrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: D.I'm not being a naysayer, the conspiracy theory may have legs, but allthis creates many more questions for me...Reasonable doubt is exactlywhat they would want to createAll this is circumstantial and we need hard evidence. Witnesses. Receipts. Black boxes. Presidential briefings. VICE Presidentialbriefings. Lewis Libby really, really drunk.For the WTC Towers and #7 to be wired for explosives would be a HUGEproject requiring a LOT of time and workers in those buildings forweeks. Where are those workers? Where is the company that carried itout? There are only a few skyscraper demo companies. No one sawthem? From whom did they order the wire? Who drove the truck?I saw a show on the Discovery Channel about why the towers fell andthey had a lot of footage of engineers studying the steel in thespecial yard it was taken to in New Jersey. There was a HUGEoperation 24/7 sifting through the rubble finding personal effects andbone/tissue fragments. The engineers and architects investigating whythey fell had cut out huge pieces of steel and had them in theiroffices. The conclusion of the TV show was that the insulationcovering the steel was blown off by the impact and explosion of theairplanes, and caused the buckling of the steel.I can't find a summary of the TV show, but here is the featured MITguy with good explanation:http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.htmlAnd a transcript of his NOVA interview:http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/collapse2.htmlNo, mention of WTC7...FEMA surely bumbled the investigation and it didfall precisely. My guess is that the 'earthquake' following the WTCtowers collapse weakened the building and the fire fueled by dieselcaused buckling in the middle of the building, but there is not enoughreliable evidence to make a determination.I can't remember the exact quote, but there is no need to attribute toevil what can adequately be explained by stupidity.One day we will know the truth...Hopefully one day it will all add up.On 4/10/06, D. Mindock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: Check out: http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/jones/StevenJones.html Basically the planes were not enough to do the collapse alone. They needed help. WRT having to have the planes hit at the exact level where there would be charges, not necessary. The upper few stories wouldn't need any but maybe they were there, just in case. Just put the charges at all the floors below. Demolition wiring is sophisticated enough to initiate the charges at the level where each plane hit to make it look like the plane's impact/fire started the pancaking. WRT to the steel beams being quickly hauled off for scrap, normally there is an investigation by the fire marshall. He would've wanted to see those beams. A lot can be learned. At a minimum, how the beams failed. Were they twisted or warped. Any signs of melting. Etc. Hauling the beams off so that no post mortem of the building could be accomplished is, in effect, destroying evidence. Also what caused the concrete to turn into
