FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist  Chat Chat  UsergroupsUsergroups  CalendarCalendar RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

My Defense Of Laurie Manwell

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    9/11, 7/7, Covid-1984 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> Articles
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Me
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 16 Jul 2006
Posts: 431

PostPosted: Thu Jun 28, 2007 6:52 pm    Post subject: My Defense Of Laurie Manwell Reply with quote

http://www.journalof911studies.com/index.html

I was reading an argumentative letter of correspondence over at the Journal Of 9/11 Studies and felt the need to send an e-mail to Steven Jones to be forwarded to Laurie Manwell as explained below.

Quote:
I didn’t know who to send to this to so I sent it to you Mr. Jones. Love your work by the way. Perhaps you could forward this to Laurie Manwell?

................

I was reading this following exchange from the ‘Letters’ section and felt the need to defend your side (for what it’s worth). I believe that James Bennett’s questioning of Manwell's interpretation of the Angus-Reid poll is purely anal retentive knit-picking. More importantly I feel that it’s also an invalid criticism.

This is the particular letter that I’m referring to entitled:

"Correspondence from James Bennett to Laurie Manwell with Responses June 27, 2007"
link to letter

This Bennett character tries to imply that none of the poll questions had anything to do with the specific attacks of 9/11 but rather just terrorist attacks in general. In support of this argument he exclusively chooses to make reference to this particular question in the poll.

"81. When it comes to what they knew prior to Sept. 11th, 2001, about possible terrorist attacks against the United States…."

What he doesn’t like to mention is a previous question which relates specifically to attacks using airplanes.

“78. Do you think that George W. Bush personally knew before Sept. 11th, 2001 about intelligence reports that warned of possible terrorist attacks against the United States using airplanes, or not?”

As we all know, 9/11 turned out to be the major terrorist attack of our time ‘using airplanes’ so it’s hard to imagine that 9/11 wasn’t being singled out in this question. After all, the Bush administration has continuously repeated the false claim that they never could’ve imagined this happening even though they were running drills simulating exactly what happened, as it happened (wink, wink). If they knew enough about the possibility of such an attack that it compelled them to conduct a drill for it then obviously they possessed very detailed and pertinent information. What they knew becomes every bit as important as what they did, or didn’t do.

Furthermore, it’s not incorrect to state that there a large numbers of Americans that believe that 9/11 was an inside job where the government 'actively participated' in its manifestation. Other polls have stated this explicitly.

http://www.scrippsnews.com/911poll

"Thirty-six percent of respondents overall said it is "very likely" or "somewhat likely" that federal officials either participated in the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon or took no action to stop them "because they wanted the United States to go to war in the Middle East."

"The poll also found that 16 percent of Americans speculate that secretly planted explosives, not burning passenger jets, were the real reason the massive twin towers of the World Trade Center collapsed."

So it seems that to avoid dealing with the truth (that large numbers of Americans really do believe in 9/11 truth), Bennett is choosing to focus on one person’s interpretation of one given survey.

He’s rolling his snot in to tiny little balls over this insignificant point. The distinction between the two following phrasings, "what they knew prior to Sept. 11th, 2001” and “the events of 9/11”.

I personally consider any party that idly sits by and allows an attack (like 9/11) to happen (while knowing in advance that it’s going to happen) is just as guilty as a party that actively participates in that attack. In fact, depending on the circumstances, the line between the two can become very blurred. For those that disagree, I’d be more than willing to put my money on the notion that the jury is going to side with me. A ‘real’ investigation might finally reveal the truth. What are the debunkers so afraid of?


Keep up the good work Laurie Manwell. Don’t allow these minions of disinformation to discourage you.


Last edited by Me on Thu Jun 28, 2007 6:58 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Me
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 16 Jul 2006
Posts: 431

PostPosted: Thu Jun 28, 2007 6:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I just wanted to add. I do believe in MIHOP over LIHOP but I temporarily accepted the LIHOP premise for the purpose of acknowledging the way that it was asked in the poll.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Me
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 16 Jul 2006
Posts: 431

PostPosted: Sat Jun 30, 2007 12:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I got a reply from Steven Jones. Looks like they'd like to possibly add it to the Journal?

Quote:
I contacted Laurie, sent her your letter.
>She agrees with me that your letter would be great as a Letter to
>the Journal -- with some changes to avoid "non-professional"
>terms...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    9/11, 7/7, Covid-1984 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> Articles All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group