OT: remember

[Joshua Zeidner]

On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 4:46 PM, Joshua Zeidner <jjzeidner at gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 4:21 PM, Alan Dayley <alandd at consultpros.com>wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 4:01 PM, Joshua Zeidner <jjzeidner at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >   but the fact that these people haven't showed up would indicate to an
>> > objective mind that perhaps we don't have the full story.  There have
>> been
>> > quite a few credible stories of 911 witnesses being harassed and
>> > threatened.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rZ_K67OHWw
>> >
>> >   this isn't a new take on this subject, but the fact that we have
>> someone
>> > right here who claims to possess such evidence, but refuses to produce
>> it is
>> > a bit disconcerting.  His alibi: that people mock and deride him when he
>> > posts the pictures.  If anything he will be mocked if he doesn't post
>> the
>> > pictures.
>>
>> Not-so-hypothetical situation:
>>
>> A amateur photograph is presented.  Taken in a room of any abandoned
>> house, there is an artifact of light to one side that looks remarkably
>> like a see-through woman in an old fashioned dress.
>>
>> The believer will point out all the reasons, some very logical, why
>> this is a picture of a ghost.  The skeptic will point out all the
>> reasons, some very logical, why it is some flare or flaw in the film
>> or something and therefore not a ghost.
>>
>> Neither will convince the other, no matter how long they discuss.
>> Why?  Because they each see through their own prejudices and beliefs.
>> They each see their own truth.
>
>
>   just a quick point... its an asymmetrical conflict.  On one hand you have
> an 'official' investigation with a (semi) consistent story and credible
> official testimony.  On the other hand you have a mob of angry theorists
> speaking at varying levels of anonymity, some which may be correct, all
> being considered as one group that shares the same level of credibility.  I
> certainly feel there is some kind of subterfuge going on here, but that
> doesn't mean that I agree with every person who disagrees with the 911
> Commission Report.
>
> Now to the topic at hand:  While I too question and wonder about all
>> the events surrounding 9/11/2001, I generally think the people on the
>> two extremes of the discussions will never reconcile.  And, no matter
>> the evidence presented, including silly government actions like
>> confiscating video and film, very few will ever change sides or
>> convince one to believe the other story.
>>
>> If Charles does or does not produce photos, it will do little to
>> decide the debate here or in the world at large.
>
>
>   Given that he did just post his pictures... the fact remains there is no
> compelling evidence of a plane hitting the pentagon.  Any reasoning
> individual would question the fact that something as big as a plane would
> likely leave incontrovertible evidence if it struck such an important
> building in such a crowded area.  Charles claims he did see a plane, and one
> interesting thing I just noticed on the CNN video- this person is saying the
> the plane 'stopped short' of the Pentagon, so does seem to agree that a
> plane was there as Charles corroborates.
>

  interesting... I 'm really no expert in the Pentagon case, I cast
aspersions on the official story due to personally known facts concerning
the NYC scene.  After doing a few minutes of research it would appear that
the notion of there being a plane in the area despite something other than a
plane hitting the Pentagon is hardly a new one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5D2K19Y-aI&feature=related .  Which is
interesting considering I was about to discount this camp altogether due to
Charles' testimony.

  just to make it clear, I do not subscribe to any and every kooky theory
you may have read concerning these attacks.  The only thing you may assume
about my viewpoint is what I have stated here.

  -jmz


>
>
>
>>  The believers will
>> continue to believe and the skeptics won't.  And if emotions run high
>> in an unproductive debate the only result will be broken
>> relationships.
>
>
>   There is a controversy, and there is a truth behind it. -jmz
>
>
> --
> "I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War
> IV will be fought with sticks and stones." --Albert Einstein
>
> - http://www.joshuazeidner.com/
>



-- 
"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV
will be fought with sticks and stones." --Albert Einstein

- http://www.joshuazeidner.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/pipermail/plug-discuss/attachments/20080912/e3e8db2c/attachment.htm