I’m not sure I’m with you on this.

Palast slams the Bush administration, slams their Middle East policy, and accuses them of hiring bin Laden to execute the 9/11 attacks. He also made some good points about the fact that we are currently in danger of getting wrapped up in debates about increasingly debunkable theories. The Jones vs Wood spat, and before that, Jones vs Fetzer, are good examples.

The only thing that might be perceived to be ‘against’ the CTers is his view that there is no evidence to support a CD. Depending upon your definition of ‘evidence’, he could well be right.

As for calling Jones ‘a fruitcake’… big deal.

What was your objection to what he said?


[edit on 1-6-2007 by coughymachine]

We got to allow people to have different opinions without 'labeling' them all the time. This is Greg's point of view and his opinion. This is what he feels about certain issues. He was very hard on Karl Rove and the whole Iraq thing. While I disagree with some of what he is saying in regards to 9/11, some of the other things he was talking about is very true.



[edit on 1-6-2007 by talisman]

The point of this post is show how a man can claim to have recieved
up to 500 internal e-mails that show at the very least complicity in the
9-11 attacks, (ie; W199I) and then claim physics professors are fruitcakes? Some of the strongest evidence out now is TC7. No debate.
Palast just blows that off as if it does not deserve proper consideration.
Never a mention of his own BBC reporting on the collapse before it fell,
never a mention of a plane not hitting TC7,
never a mention of the whole Silverstein event, nothing.


Let me be clear here. I do not believe in PODS, ALIENS, SCALAR TECH,
Holograms and the rest of what I call SCI-FI claims. The whole event
was executed by convention menas in my opinion, very poorly I might add. The only thing that went fairly well for the administration was the
media control, and now ( thank God) that's slipping.

That whole interview was about slamming the movement. It doesn't
really matter if you believe the official story or not.
It is difficult to make a claim of belief in 9-11 truth, and then turn on the movement. Palast is 2 faced and is only motivated by money. No ETHICS.


I put alot of faith in a man being as good as his word. His word is weak, as is his ethics. 9-11 truth helped his book sales in more than just a
minor way. If this man can "flip " on this movement, he can flip on you too.

If you are still in the dark about this, sorry........

[edit on 1-6-2007 by amfree86]

Originally posted by talisman
We got to allow people to have different opinions without 'labeling' them all the time. This is Greg's point of view and his opinion. This is what he feels about certain issues. He was very hard on Karl Rove and the whole Iraq thing. While I disagree with some of what he is saying in regards to 9/11, some of the other things he was talking about is very true.



[edit on 1-6-2007 by talisman]

BTW: I don't know where you live, But I live in the USA. That doesn't make me any better than anyone, but it does give me the right to say that this country is in enough trouble because of compromise. We as a country have compromised away nearly every bit of the Constitution

I'm done with compromise, especially with an individual who has/is trying to set this movement back.

Without 9-11 truth, this country has had it, probably Canada too.

I don't make a habbit of slamming anyone, but Palast has brought this on himself. You can Believe one thing, Doesn't matter If the ATS crew see this as big news or not. This is not going to end with a hand-shake.

in the first 15 seconds of this clip enough biased opinion was spewed to discredit anything said.

if we ever want to get to the truth we need to stop crap like this from being produced.

i apolagize for calling it crap in the sense that i did not elaborate as to why, however some things are indeed elementary, m dear watsons.