| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Hazzard
Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 May 2006
Posts: 368
|
 Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2006 12:33 am Post subject: focus on the ball |
 |
|
Hey guys just wanted to apologise incase I hurt anyones feelings the other day. My pionts were overshadowed by my lack of compassion and my impertinent manner.
Allow me to rephrase in the hope that this discussion can bring this forum under some kind of peaceful consensus in regards to the problems we are trying to solve.
The question is this:
What is more important for those seeking the truth of 9/11?
How the buildings were brought down? Or who brought them down and why?
I feel that by focusing on who was responsible, decyphering the how would be an automatic product of any solution found once these people were actualy brought to justice.
I feel that COINTELPRO agents are working around the clock, to slowly dismantle everything this leaderless resistance has managed so far. Part of this is with the attempt to create some sort of divide among ourselves. A 9/11 civil war if you will. This is a classic sign of intelligence work as they specialise in creating civil wars among peoples to soften them up for a real war.
We cannot allow ourselves, who claim to be so clever, to fall before such feable subterfuge. We are better than this, we are smarter than this, and it would be a shame for us to loose the oppurtunity we lost with Kennedy.
We have to remain focused, leaderless, with one single cuase. The cuase is the revelation of truth. The forced surfacing of corrupt criminals amongst western government. Like oil they seperate from water when the vessel is settled, they thrive on shaking up the status quo to keep themselves well mixed and undiscovered. We have to force a status quo. We have to seperate the oil from the water once and for all, so that no matter what false flag operations take place again, we dont allow ourselves to be fooled twice and we can remain focused on our objective.
_________________
Since when? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Leiff
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Joined: 23 May 2006
Posts: 509
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2006 1:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
'Fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again.'
George W Bush |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
telecasterisation
Banned
Joined: 10 Sep 2006
Posts: 1873
Location: Upstairs
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2006 9:41 am Post subject: Re: focus on the ball |
|
|
| Hazzard wrote: |
The question is this:
What is more important for those seeking the truth of 9/11?
How the buildings were brought down? Or who brought them down and why?
|
Each in their own way is equally important, but unless you have proof about the 'how', you will never move forward to the 'who'.
Look at it this way, you cannot say who did it unless you can prove exactly what it was that they did, they are so intrinsically linked. You can't stand someone up in court without evidence and until you have that, all the fingerpointing in the world will mean nothing.
_________________
I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blackbear
Validated Poster
Joined: 08 Aug 2006
Posts: 656
Location: up north
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2006 12:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The idea of criminal proceedings against the perpetrators of 9/11, is in my opinion misguided, since I believe this will never happen.
Pointing out that the official explanation for 9/11 is a joke is not a problem when I have discussed the subject with hundreds of people over the years. ......steel building, WTC7, controlled demolition, etc
The important point is who + why. Cui bono comes to mind. What tends to fascinate me are those people and organisations who will not question the mainstream version.
Who have gained from the catalyst/pearl harbour of 9/11.?
I think the present day movers + shakers will be delighted by the recent attention to the "how" rather than the "who" + "why".
William Rodriguez ..........thousands didn't turn up for work........
Don't forget the dancers........they obviously knew the show was arranged...... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Patrick Brown
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 10 Oct 2006
Posts: 1201
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2006 12:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Maybe it was two groups/organizations working together one possible example might be the Neo-Cons and the Zionists. If there's any truth in my example then a focused debate around the planet may cause them to doubt each others position. This doubt may then manifest itself in attempts to fit the other up.
I don't know who did 911 but I don't think we should be frightened to speculate. As BB said “Cui bono”.
_________________
We check the evidence and then archive it: www.911evidencebase.co.uk
Get the Steven E Jones reports >HERE< |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thermate
Angel - now passed away
Joined: 13 Nov 2006
Posts: 445
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2006 2:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Patrick Brown wrote: | | Neo-Cons and the Zionists. |
Quite.
Clearly Israel benefits from the 911 aftermath and the likely future fate of Iran and Syria... Lets also not forget that j*ws own or edit 95% of mainstream media, including the record and movie industry.
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-2307458672511591841&q=911
Many other good 911 videos by the same author.
_________________
Make love, not money. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hazzard
Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 May 2006
Posts: 368
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2006 3:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
We will never know exactly how. We know more about who.
If we continue arguing about how, we will never get anywhere.
Taking legal proceedings is the only way this situation can be fixed. Anything else calls for open revolution.
_________________
Since when? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
telecasterisation
Banned
Joined: 10 Sep 2006
Posts: 1873
Location: Upstairs
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2006 4:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Hazzard wrote: | We will never know exactly how. We know more about who.
If we continue arguing about how, we will never get anywhere.
Taking legal proceedings is the only way this situation can be fixed. Anything else calls for open revolution. |
You seem to miss the crucial point here.
There can never be a 'who' until you know the how and what.
If this is something you cannot grasp, simply take any name, Bush for example. He is an example of the possible 'who'.
Now, focus on him, what is he an example of? In other words, HOW have you established that he is a 'who' without evidence of the what?
You could never establish he is a 'who' (guilty, complicite or an accomplice), UNTIL you know what he is supposed to have done = the what and the how.
Put simply, how would you establish he actually is a 'who', what process would you go through to arrive at that conclusion?
_________________
I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hazzard
Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 May 2006
Posts: 368
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 24, 2006 12:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | You seem to miss the crucial point here.
There can never be a 'who' until you know the how and what.
If this is something you cannot grasp, simply take any name, Bush for example. He is an example of the possible 'who'.
Now, focus on him, what is he an example of? In other words, HOW have you established that he is a 'who' without evidence of the what?
You could never establish he is a 'who' (guilty, complicite or an accomplice), UNTIL you know what he is supposed to have done = the what and the how.
Put simply, how would you establish he actually is a 'who', what process would you go through to arrive at that conclusion? |
This is not a strawman argument. This is what they hope will happen.
I dont blame Bush, so I cannot continue with your example.
I blame Cheney and his paymasters, as well as people who would have benefitted from the insider trading prior to the towers collapsing. Who do you go to?
Silverstein
Cheney
Bush Sr.
Rockefeller
Rothschild
Obviously these people are never going to be brought before a court of law. But if you want to know how than you ask these "WHOS".
_________________
Since when? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
telecasterisation
Banned
Joined: 10 Sep 2006
Posts: 1873
Location: Upstairs
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 24, 2006 9:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Hazzard wrote: | | Quote: | You seem to miss the crucial point here.
There can never be a 'who' until you know the how and what.
If this is something you cannot grasp, simply take any name, Bush for example. He is an example of the possible 'who'.
Now, focus on him, what is he an example of? In other words, HOW have you established that he is a 'who' without evidence of the what?
You could never establish he is a 'who' (guilty, complicite or an accomplice), UNTIL you know what he is supposed to have done = the what and the how.
Put simply, how would you establish he actually is a 'who', what process would you go through to arrive at that conclusion? |
I dont blame Bush, so I cannot continue with your example.
I blame Cheney and his paymasters, as well as people who would have benefitted from the insider trading prior to the towers collapsing. Who do you go to?
Silverstein
Cheney
Bush Sr.
Rockefeller
Rothschild
Obviously these people are never going to be brought before a court of law. But if you want to know how than you ask these "WHOS". |
You've done it again, the point has simply been missed - Bush was the example I used to explain the premise - choose who you like.
As for my early 'court of law' example, I was not suggesting that anyone actually been prosecuted, again this was just one possible outcome.
However, you have supplied a short list of names, they are examples of 'who's' - what exactly makes them 'who's'?
_________________
I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Patrick Brown
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 10 Oct 2006
Posts: 1201
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 24, 2006 12:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| telecasterisation wrote: | | Hazzard wrote: | | Quote: | You seem to miss the crucial point here.
There can never be a 'who' until you know the how and what.
If this is something you cannot grasp, simply take any name, Bush for example. He is an example of the possible 'who'.
Now, focus on him, what is he an example of? In other words, HOW have you established that he is a 'who' without evidence of the what?
You could never establish he is a 'who' (guilty, complicite or an accomplice), UNTIL you know what he is supposed to have done = the what and the how.
Put simply, how would you establish he actually is a 'who', what process would you go through to arrive at that conclusion? |
I dont blame Bush, so I cannot continue with your example.
I blame Cheney and his paymasters, as well as people who would have benefitted from the insider trading prior to the towers collapsing. Who do you go to?
Silverstein
Cheney
Bush Sr.
Rockefeller
Rothschild
Obviously these people are never going to be brought before a court of law. But if you want to know how than you ask these "WHOS". |
You've done it again, the point has simply been missed - Bush was the example I used to explain the premise - choose who you like.
As for my early 'court of law' example, I was not suggesting that anyone actually been prosecuted, again this was just one possible outcome.
However, you have supplied a short list of names, they are examples of 'who's' - what exactly makes them 'who's'? |
Introduction to Algebra: http://www.mathleague.com/help/algebra/algebra.htm
| Quote: | | When an equation has a variable, the solution to the equation is the number that makes the equation true when we replace the variable with its value. |
X marks the spot and the persons/perpetrators.
_________________
We check the evidence and then archive it: www.911evidencebase.co.uk
Get the Steven E Jones reports >HERE< |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Light Infantree
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Joined: 28 Sep 2006
Posts: 300
Location: Ipswich, Suffolk
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 24, 2006 3:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
TC is quite correct and now, I trust, pleased that someone else has pointed this out.
There must be a leading focus on 'how'. From this people will begin to understand the truth about many other negative aspects of the world we live in. It is up to the individual to then choose where that information. This state of mind can really established after we know 'how'.
The 'who', 'why' and any other issues are important and if you like, just as important, but I would suggest that we do not get bogged down in the pit of enternal stench about it. The people/issues/reasons/etc are all part of the web of deceipt that we are just begining to see reveal it self. There is more to deal with than simply 9/11 in the wake of that one event being understood by the majority. Though 9/11 will prove to be the Whirrld Management Teams gravest error of judgement its tip of the iceberg. Currently the majority of people have not a scooby doo about any of it and are happy acumulating Tesco club card points in celebration of the fact. By focusing on 'how' (with a veiw to the rest of the unfolding story -who/why etc) we have the most organic and logical way of allowing the shoppers to stop shopping for one second stepaway from the credit card and have a fighting chance before securtiy arrests them for blocking the isle. We must grab peoples attention. ' How' is the attention seeker for most people in my experience. Only then will they begin to understand how they have been duped . There is a real need to be patient with this. Many people, in my experience completley shut off when they are comfronted with the idea that someone they trusted (eg a leader) is a cold blooded killer. When they see the eveidence about how and begin to ask the questions about who and why - then it is time to release the hounds of 'who' & 'why'.
_________________
It's not about terror, its about illusion. It's not about war, it's about you
Stop worrying, take risks
Be brave
The revolution has been cancelled - its an evolution and everyone's included |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
telecasterisation
Banned
Joined: 10 Sep 2006
Posts: 1873
Location: Upstairs
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 24, 2006 3:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Patrick Brown wrote;
| Quote: | | When an equation has a variable, the solution to the equation is the number that makes the equation true when we replace the variable with its value. |
A highly convoluted way of avoiding the issue with no relevance to the point in debate.
You cite numbers and that is exactly what we have, a huge number of possible perps and nothing concrete, just assumption. This cannot be resolved with equations.
Currently all we have is differing ideas as to who did it - we can never find out without a path to follow to the people responsible.
_________________
I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hazzard
Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 May 2006
Posts: 368
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 24, 2006 5:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well I would have enjoyed this explanation during the french revolution, to one of the peasants.
Or perhaps to a Ranger during 1942.
Or perhaps an American patriot during 1770
'How' is never going to be a solid foundation, you have people dedicated to blurring that conclusion until you're grey and dead. We know who, and those who refuse to accept it, do not reserve the right to get involved until after they are capable of seeing the manipulation.
This isnt a chicken egg argument. I dont have to explain to you how. If your a suspect, you get investigated than you discover how.
_________________
Since when? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
telecasterisation
Banned
Joined: 10 Sep 2006
Posts: 1873
Location: Upstairs
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 24, 2006 6:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Hazzard wrote: | Well I would have enjoyed this explanation during the french revolution, to one of the peasants.
Or perhaps to a Ranger during 1942.
Or perhaps an American patriot during 1770
'How' is never going to be a solid foundation, you have people dedicated to blurring that conclusion until you're grey and dead. We know who, and those who refuse to accept it, do not reserve the right to get involved until after they are capable of seeing the manipulation.
This isnt a chicken egg argument. I dont have to explain to you how. If your a suspect, you get investigated than you discover how. |
It isn't so much the 'how' but 'what', in other words who did WHAT.
You are saying;
| Quote: | | We know who, and those who refuse to..... |
Fantastic, now prove WHAT they did to the world, for that is what we have to do to move forward. It isn't enough to keep fingerpointing, we need proof - suspicion alone will get us nowhere.
This is what I mean by 'what'.
_________________
I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blackbear
Validated Poster
Joined: 08 Aug 2006
Posts: 656
Location: up north
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 24, 2006 9:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Telecasterisation...
I am sure after maybe years of studying the subject of 9/11, and the high level of interest you have for this site,(329 posts ..4.39 a day).
Who do you think should be in the line up.............?
"we can never find out without a path to follow to the people responsible."........please enliven us with your wisdom .
..".now prove WHAT they did to the world, for that is what we have to do to move forward. ...suspicion alone will get us nowhere.".....
any advice on how we do that......?
William Rodriguez.........thousands didn't turn up for work.......
The dancers knew the show was on.......... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
telecasterisation
Banned
Joined: 10 Sep 2006
Posts: 1873
Location: Upstairs
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 24, 2006 9:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| blackbear wrote: | Telecasterisation...
I am sure after maybe years of studying the subject of 9/11, and the high level of interest you have for this site,(329 posts ..4.39 a day).
Who do you think should be in the line up.............?
"we can never find out without a path to follow to the people responsible."........please enliven us with your wisdom .
..".now prove WHAT they did to the world, for that is what we have to do to move forward. ...suspicion alone will get us nowhere.".....
any advice on how we do that......?
William Rodriguez.........thousands didn't turn up for work.......
The dancers knew the show was on.......... |
Without wishing to appear to avoid your question, I genuinely cannot be certain about who constructed and executed 9/11.
If pressured, I would guess at the current administration as this seems the most logical choice given the access requirements to all the areas and equipment concerned, not to mention the hardcore personnel.
As for the second part of your query, if it was merely a case of me offering advice and you acting on it, then it would be game on. Unfortunately, you will be aware that this site exists as do many others and it consists of lots of dedicated individuals hell-bent on seeking 'The Truth'. The best we can jointly come up with is to just spread the word of what we thus far 'know'.
Until something new emerges, something concrete, something irrefutable, we simply don't have what we need to complete the task before us. There will be those that will argue this, that's okay, but this is not meant to be a negative or derogatory point, it is a statement of fact from my perspective. What we have is enough to gain new interest and 'convert', but not sufficient to 'prove' it.
So for the moment, there is nothing I can supply you nor The Movement. Why? It simply doesn't exist and if it does, it is currently not visible.
I remain optimistic.
_________________
I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hazzard
Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 May 2006
Posts: 368
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 24, 2006 11:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You need proof? Look around you. David Rockefeller admits to controlling American banking system and forign policy in his memoirs in the New American Magazine.
Silverstien had a crazy insurance policy on WTC 1, 2 and 7 the same towers that just happened to collapse.
Put options on Airlines prior to the deed.
Israeli messenging company forwarning their staff.
Uh whats the piont I could list literaly thousands of things that piont to all sorts of contributors.
_________________
Since when? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blackbear
Validated Poster
Joined: 08 Aug 2006
Posts: 656
Location: up north
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 24, 2006 11:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Telecasterisation............why are you not interested in discovering the truth, wrongly or rightly./
Why are you on here...........Hazzard raises some interesting points..........try answering them or ....
What are you doing here..........
William Rodrigues.............thousands didn't turn up for work..... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
telecasterisation
Banned
Joined: 10 Sep 2006
Posts: 1873
Location: Upstairs
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 25, 2006 12:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| blackbear wrote: | Telecasterisation............why are you not interested in discovering the truth, wrongly or rightly./
Why are you on here...........Hazzard raises some interesting points..........try answering them or ....
What are you doing here..........
William Rodrigues.............thousands didn't turn up for work..... |
You think I need convincing? I am convinced - it is the citizens of the world who have no idea about 9/11 are the ones you need focus upon.
The school teacher needs the man who remote controlled the aircraft before she will believe. The serving police officer has to be confronted by the person who helped set the charges. The housewife needs the FBI agent who confiscated the footage from the hotels around The Pentagon who made a copy to come forward with it.
David Rockefeller, airline options, insurance scams - unfortunately aren't the things to do it. All this is merely circumstantial to the man in the street.
Such 'evidence' is the equivalent of The Van Allen Radiation Belt, or x-rays, or no crater under the lunar lander to those who are told we didn't go to the moon - you need Buzz Aldrin to openly admit they never went before they will believe. 9/11 is no different, to you it is proof, to the world it obviously isn't.
Try answering them you say? I fully concur with what you outline, I am more than interested in discovering The Truth, you simply chose to view me as something I am not.
_________________
I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hazzard
Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 May 2006
Posts: 368
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 25, 2006 7:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | The school teacher needs the man who remote controlled the aircraft before she will believe. The serving police officer has to be confronted by the person who helped set the charges. The housewife needs the FBI agent who confiscated the footage from the hotels around The Pentagon who made a copy to come forward with it. |
Im sorry but if someone refuses to accept that the guy holding the bloody knife, who was at the crime scene at the same time, and would be the one who recieved the victims posessions than im sorry but that person is a fool. They will be the cheerleaders of the NWO.
_________________
Since when? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
telecasterisation
Banned
Joined: 10 Sep 2006
Posts: 1873
Location: Upstairs
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 25, 2006 10:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Hazzard wrote: | | Quote: | | The school teacher needs the man who remote controlled the aircraft before she will believe. The serving police officer has to be confronted by the person who helped set the charges. The housewife needs the FBI agent who confiscated the footage from the hotels around The Pentagon who made a copy to come forward with it. |
Im sorry but if someone refuses to accept that the guy holding the bloody knife, who was at the crime scene at the same time, and would be the one who recieved the victims posessions than im sorry but that person is a fool. They will be the cheerleaders of the NWO. |
What percentage do you think of those given Loose Change, or spoken to in detail about 9/11, actually take it all on board, become 'members' of The Movement, take it further, spread the word? My personal view, is a really large percentage do nothing other than nod knowingly, then move on to something else.
The information we have, that we move amongst ourselves becomes gospel to us - you quote a bloody knife based upon what you believe. You can see it all so clearly because of your research, your focus, but you then label those that do not share your insight as fools. Maybe so, maybe they do not have the ability to visualise and accept the way you do, but that is not really the task before us;
Currently we have a wealth of second-rate information and 'proof' all based upon assumption and the laws of physics. It is difficult to accept I know, but the only way the world of fools will accept 9/11 as a conspiracy is with undeniable unquestionable evidence which we simply do not have at this time. Quoting insurance scams just ain't gonna cut it, bloody knife or not.
_________________
I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hazzard
Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 May 2006
Posts: 368
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 25, 2006 3:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I would die to save a fool from danger, even a fool that hates me for his ignorance.
What percentage of people ever believe in anything or ever stand up for anything? The majority will always be the apathetic masses. Its the small percentage. The select few who have the nutsacks to stand up and make a difference, that matters.
_________________
Since when? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
