9-11 was an inside job

[Lloyd Danforth]

In my opinion he has every right to live his life the way he wants just like you and he has been nothing but a positive contributor to this forum. 

I wouldn't go that easy on him, he is, after all, a federal employee.  He doesn't have a right to live at the expense of  (net) taxpayers.

[Raineyrocks]

Kevin is almost completely a positive contributer to the forum.  His sole liability is that he seems to have a burden in his heart to challenge everyone who doubts the official government story on 9/11.  Ironically, he admits that he doesn't believe the government story.  But he only seems to want people to go down certain paths or certain lines of inquiry.

If that is so then why can't those be the points being made here, instead of his employment?   

[Raineyrocks]

In my opinion he has every right to live his life the way he wants just like you and he has been nothing but a positive contributor to this forum. 

I wouldn't go that easy on him, he is, after all, a federal employee.  He doesn't have a right to live at the expense of  (net) taxpayers.

I'm not trying to go easy or hard on anyone.  I'm just trying to say that even if he makes a living off of the taxpayers it's his choice and we're not the all mighty jury on KB's life.   

[powerchuter]

Kevin had a lot of time in his employment track before he discovered liberty. Giving up his present employment would probably effect the pension he has worked for for years. Unless you have worked 30 years towards a goal and are willing to give it up, I don't think you should be too hard on him.  I'm guessing that is everyone one this page.

Lloyd that makes perfect sense. It's nice to see some non-judgmental, intelligent thought process here!

... but let's just say this is the only job he could get to support his family...

There has to be another way. If the job includes using force against others, then it must not be the right thing to do.

Russell of course you know that your entitled to your opinion as is everyone else on this board.  Why all of the sudden the attack on KB Craig though?  In my opinion he has every right to live his life the way he wants just like you and he has been nothing but a positive contributor to this forum. 

This thread has so much crap in it, how can anyone stand it!?!

Rainey states "In my opinion he has every right to live his life the way he wants just like you"!?!?!

So, what I get from that is...

Kevin can continue to assist in the continued incarceration of both the innocent and the not so innocent...at the direct and indirect expense of those who pay taxes under threat of being incarcerated by the very system that keeps Kevin employed...

I'm with Russell and others in feeling that "the jailers" not only keep plenty of innocent political prisoners incarcerated, but also use aggression, incarceration, and lethal force to tax(steal) from the people to get their share of the loot.

[powerchuter]

Let me put it this way, maybe you'll understand , if someone broke into your home and tortured and murdered your family, would you want that someone out on the street free and clear?  What you and Russell are saying is, open the prison doors and let these scumbags back on the street to hurt more people?

Yes
I do not believe that powerchuter shares my thoughts on imprisoning torturers and killers.
But I do agree with him that some jobs are not right to perform.

Russell,
I'm interested in clarifying the "yes" in your previous post and also desire to inquire about your thoughts on imprisoning torturers and killers(you know, both the currently incarcerated and those still at large like Bush and Cheney to name just a few).

Thanks

[KBCraig]

I do not believe "the government's story"; I believe what I saw. I do not attack anyone who questions the government's story, but I do question the integrity of those who propagate made-up theories as "truth" -- no matter whether those theories are the government's or those opposing the government.

So what do you believe happened on 9/11?  I think that's the crucial point here.  You can say, "I don't believe the government's story, and I don't believe the conspiracy theorists.  I only believe what I saw with my eyes." 

Fair enough. I believe that four airplanes were seized in flight on 9/11. Two airplanes were deliberately flown into the WTC towers. A third hit the Pentagon. The fourth crashed near Shanksville, PA.

I have read, or attempted to read, many of the "9/11 Truth" documents and watched the videos. I say "attempted", because some are just so obviously wrong that there's no point continuing to read. (That is actually a common technique for recruiting into religious cults and seminar sales: present something so outrageous that potential doubters are driven away, and anyone who remains is "pre-qualified" as manipulable.)

I believe it's entirely possible that those who seized the planes and flew them into their targets were either working for, or manipulated by, some unknown element in the U.S. government. I also believe it's entirely possible that they were not connected to the government in any way. Neither possibility constitutes evidence, much less proof.

I do not believe the towers were pre-wired with explosives. Not only would that require months of invasive work, it would be completely unreliable, because the aircraft impact alone would have too great a chance of destroying the wiring. It's also implausible; why do both?

I believe most of the "9/11 Truth" movement is driven by dislike and distrust of government. And that's fair: we have every reason to dislike and distrust the government, because the government itself has shown plenty of contempt for the public.

What is not fair is to use that dislike and distrust to believe that the government must have done this, and then search for supporting evidence while ignoring all contrary evidence. The same standard applies to the government apologists. Scientific evidence is politically neutral, and doesn't seek a pre-determined conclusion.

[KBCraig]

Kevin is almost completely a positive contributer to the forum.  His sole liability is that he seems to have a burden in his heart to challenge everyone who doubts the official government story on 9/11.

That's not quite correct. My challenge is to people who present nonsensical fairy tales as "truth".

Why do I keep challenging? Because I want it to be obvious to casual onlookers that not everyone in the Freedom movement believes 9/11 was an inside job.

Ironically, he admits that he doesn't believe the government story.  But he only seems to want people to go down certain paths or certain lines of inquiry.

I don't want to limit lines of inquiry. I only want people going down those paths to recognize giant gaping chasm across the path when they see them, instead of making that leap of logic across the gap and continuing on as if it wasn't there.

Kevin

[Russell Kanning]

Why all of the sudden the attack on KB Craig though?

For good or bad I have been hassling KB for a long time on this forum.

[Russell Kanning]

Russell,
I'm interested in clarifying the "yes" in your previous post and also desire to inquire about your thoughts on imprisoning torturers and killers ...

Time to set the prisoners free.

[Russell Kanning]

psst..... did you know that 9/11 was an inside job?

[KBCraig]

Why all of the sudden the attack on KB Craig though?

For good or bad I have been hassling KB for a long time on this forum.

It's mutual. 

[error]

Kevin had a lot of time in his employment track before he discovered liberty. Giving up his present employment would probably effect the pension he has worked for for years. Unless you have worked 30 years towards a goal and are willing to give it up, I don't think you should be too hard on him.  I'm guessing that is everyone one this page.

Almost everyone has to deal with this issue at one point or another: the desire to get rid of everything the government does, except for our one pet issue. This is even harder when your pet issue also happens to be your retirement.

[Raineyrocks]

author=raineyrocks link=topic=1747.msg143047#msg143047 date=1175990607]... but let's just say this is the only job he could get to support his family...
There has to be another way. If the job includes using force against others, then it must not be the right thing to do.


Russell of course you know that your entitled to your opinion as is everyone else on this board.  Why all of the sudden the attack on KB Craig though?  In my opinion he has every right to live his life the way he wants just like you and he has been nothing but a positive contributor to this forum. 


This thread has so much crap in it, how can anyone stand it!?!

Rainey states "In my opinion he has every right to live his life the way he wants just like you"!?!?!

So, what I get from that is...

Kevin can continue to assist in the continued incarceration of both the innocent and the not so innocent...at the direct and indirect expense of those who pay taxes under threat of being incarcerated by the very system that keeps Kevin employed...

I'm with Russell and others in feeling that "the jailers" not only keep plenty of innocent political prisoners incarcerated, but also use aggression, incarceration, and lethal force to tax(steal) from the people to get their share of the loot.

If this thread has so much crap in it which by the way some is your very own then don't read it anymore.  I wasn't aware Kevin needed my permission to do anything or yours.  "The jailers" also keep murderers, rapists and other criminals away from other people and as I stated before I'm well aware there are innocent people locked up but was Kevin their jury and judge?  So let's see you can't stand people that steal, (get their income from taxes), but rapists and murderers belong free? 

[Raineyrocks]

Why all of the sudden the attack on KB Craig though?

For good or bad I have been hassling KB for a long time on this forum.

I did not know this, sorry!

[MaineShark]

What is not fair is to use that dislike and distrust to believe that the government must have done this, and then search for supporting evidence while ignoring all contrary evidence. The same standard applies to the government apologists. Scientific evidence is politically neutral, and doesn't seek a pre-determined conclusion.

Exactly.

I have no trouble swallowing the notion that certain elements of the US Government could fake a terrorist attack for political gain.  What I do have trouble swallowing is the notion that they used complex and wholly un-necessary methods to do that, when the obvious method could easily accomplish the task, and would only require a tiny conspiracy to pull off.  Heck, the actual folks who flew the planes didn't even need to be in on it.  One person in the right place could have convinced them to do it, and gave the order.

Joe