Zionist War Crimes
http://www.vsocial.com/video/?d=39982

Peace, Propaganda and the Promised Land
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6604775898578139565

for the ratings. i wonder who could have given this fine entry a one, not explain the reasoning behind it and disappear? actually, i couldn't care less. just though i'd inject a little whining :P
an interesting list from a few years ago...
By Charley Reese
The Orlando Sentinel

Question: Which country alone in the Middle East has nuclear weapons?
Answer: Israel.

Q: Which country in the Middle East refuses to sign the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and bars international inspections?
A: Israel.

Q: Which country in the Middle East seized the sovereign territory of other nations by military force and continues to occupy it in defiance of United Nations Security Council resolutions?
A: Israel.

Q: Which country in the Middle East routinely violates the international borders of another sovereign state with warplanes and artillery and naval gunfire?
A: Israel.

Q: What American ally in the Middle East has for years sent assassins into other countries to kill its political enemies (a practice sometimes called exporting terrorism)?
A: Israel.

Q: In which country in the Middle East have high-ranking military officers admitted publicly that unarmed prisoners of war were executed?
A: Israel.

Q: What country in the Middle East refuses to prosecute its soldiers who have acknowledged executing prisoners of war?
A: Israel.

Q: What country in the Middle East created 762,000 refugees and refuses to allow them to return to their homes, farms and businesses? A: Israel.

Q: What country in the Middle East refuses to pay compensation to people whose land, bank accounts and businesses it confiscated?
A: Israel.

Q: In what country in the Middle East was a high-ranking United Nations diplomat assassinated?
A: Israel.

Q: In what country in the Middle East did the man who ordered the assassination of a high-ranking U.N. diplomat become prime minister?
A: Israel.

Q: What country in the Middle East blew up an American diplomatic facility in Egypt and attacked a U.S. ship in international waters, killing 33 and wounding 177 American sailors?
A: Israel.

Q: What country in the Middle East employed a spy, Jonathan Pollard, to steal classified documents and then gave some of them to the Soviet Union?
A: Israel.

Q: What country at first denied any official connection to Pollard, then voted to make him a citizen and has continuously demanded that the American president grant Pollard a full pardon?
A: Israel.

Q: What country on Planet Earth has the second most powerful lobby in the United States, according to a recent Fortune magazine survey of Washington insiders?
A: Israel.

Q: Which country in the Middle East is in defiance of 69 United Nations Security Council resolutions and has been protected from 29 more by U.S. vetoes?
A: Israel.

Q: What country is the United States threatening to bomb because "U.N. Security Council resolutions must be obeyed?"
A: Iraq

and a couple of add-ons...
Which country in the Middle East has Attacked the US twice in known false flag operations (not including 911) the Lavon Affair and the USS Liberty attack? Israel

Which country Spied on the US multiple times with the Pollad scandal, the ADL (1993 during the first WTC bombing) the Art Students, and AIPAC? Israel

now get your wolf (man, i love that name) blitzer fix with this video

____________________
http://anti-neocons.com/

Yes it's true that some people voted this blog a 1, which is their right--I do it myself on occasion when I have serious problems with a post for whatever reason. Let's not worry too much about the fact that people use 1s to register their disagreement--this isn't a popularity contest!

I appreciate everyone's contributions to this thread and I think it's worthwhile for people, especially newcomers, to consider the subjects linked to that may at first seem marginally if at all related to 9/11.

Let us say outright that the 9/11 truth movement includes people who think that Israel played a minor role in 9/11 and people who think 9/11 was essentially "Made in Israel" and brought to America with the help of the neocons in the Bush administration. It should be noted that among those who think that elements of Israel's government (or even criminal underground) played a major role in 9/11 there are some people who truly are bigots. This is a sad truth that we can't ignore, but neither do we have to feel guilty about the fact that we share certain (by no means all) beliefs with such people (no need to name names--as a great Jew once said, by their deeds ye shall know them!) We do not deny that the earth revolves around the sun simply because our enemies also believe that--we would likewise be quite foolish if we ignored important facts out of social discomfort--one would think that truthers of all people can see how unpopular views can turn out to be correct.

Lines of course must be drawn between legitimate criticism and allegations and those that derive from hate and indeed are intended to sow distrust and perpetuate historical animosities. Jews have, like so many other minorities throughout history, suffered persecution and prejudice. As in so many other cases, it has been primarily the common people and the poor amongst the persecuted group that have suffered disproportionately. The history of the Jewish diaspora is long and complex (for a great analysis by an Israeli Jew see Israel Shahak's Jewish History Jewish Religion--The Weight of 3000 Years) and culminated relatively recently (late 1800s) in what is know as the Zionist project--a political movement led by atheist Jewish European elites to establish a Jewish state in the land of Palestine which at the time was ruled over by the British empire (the last in a long series of empires to rule over the land's inhabitants--Muslim, Jewish, and Christian, among otehrs--predating even the Roman empire.) The idea of creating a Jewish state in Palestine was vehemently opposed by most religious Jews at first--they saw Zionism (correctly) as an atheistic political doctrine and as such in direct opposition to the Jewish religion which is centered around the belief that God would deliver the Jewish people through the Messiah of prophecy and that actively intervening on God's behalf was a sacrilege.

The nation today known as Israel is a product of that inherent contradiction. While it justifies its existence as a protector of Jews it is actually the main source of modern anti-semitism. As such it lives off of a vicious cycle whereby its actions create the animosity and too often violent backlash that in turn justifies (in the minds of some) even more severe actions that further alienate the average Jew from the average Joe. Lack of support for Israel is portrayed as self-hatred and worse (see www.masada2000.org ) and thus forced into embracing Israel many Jews naturally feel threatened by non-Jews who insist on holding the Israeli government to the same standards of conduct expected of countries that do not want to be labelled as "rogue states". Zionists play off this insecurity pointing out so-called double standards whereby Israel is held to a higher standard than many other countries with equally bad records of human rights abuses. Perhaps the epitome of this double standard and one that we as Americans should in fairness be sensitive to is the fact that America itself was founded on another peoples' land from which the original inhabitants were violently removed. It may sound trite but this is one of those cases where two wrongs don't make a right. Instead of justifying Zionists' actions our own history should serve as a reminder that if humanity is to make real progress we must not allow each other to repeat mistakes made centuries ago.

Another manifestation of Israel's internal existential conflict is apparent when one looks at how corrupt the politicians who govern this holy land are. Politics corrupt as much as money and power (what else is there to politics after all) and the rot in the case of Israel has extended to the realm of religion where some orthodox sects have become some of the most reactionary and hard line supporters of Zionism and have succeeded in pushing the Zionist ideal to the limit by advocating complete annexation not just of the Palestinian territories but in some cases even more land, depending on the particular definition of eretz Israel (the term for the biblical boundaries of Israel that extend into Iraq.) As the world knows too well, religious fanaticism is one of the most potent varieties and this can be seen in the way that settlers on illegaly occupied Palestinian land tend to be relatively less wealthy and more religious than the average Israeli.

It is in this light that those of us who choose the unpopular route of trying to break through the American media bias and influence of the organized Israel lobby see the injustice of the world's current obsession with fundamentalist Islam, that no one will deny can be, but is not always, a similarly destructive influence on the struggle for peace and understanding. While we are all conditioned to expect crimes like 9/11 from arab/muslim "terrorists", the concept of a Jewish, or better put Zionist terrorist is quite foreign and we tend at first to reject the idea as stemming from anti-Jewish sentiment when it is expressed. Of course since it is a taboo subject, only the most extreme hateful voices are heard expressing these facts--David Duke for one has made a career by co-opting all hard hitting criticism of Israel and wrapping it in hateful anti-Jewish rhetoric. It's not hard to see that cynical Zionists are ever grateful to the likes of Duke for insulating them from criticism--after all, who wants to agree with David Duke on anything?

It is pointless to speculate as to how much of that may be at work in the 9/11 Truth movement. Eric Hufschmid and Daryl Bradford Smith would seem to some to be intentionally insensitive so as to associate allegations of Israeli agency in the events of 9/11 with intolerance and even hate. It may be so, but the bottom line is twofold. We must insist on zero-tolerance of racist or in any way bigoted generalizations (e.g. something along the lines of "that's how all Jews are") while at the same time insisting that those who approach the subject of crimes committed by Israelis or Zionists, alone or in collaboration with others or each other, not be accused of anti-semitism or of being motivated by ill will that is in fact absent. Just as there are crime families that are primarily Italian, so there are those that are primarily Jewish, Colombian, Irish, or of any other bond of commonality. If our goal is peace and coexistence we cannot fail to express ourselves with the utmost care and clarity--belaboring certain points if necessary, such as our ultimate desire for reconciliation, understanding, and compromise.

To any who would try to play this as a game to be won for one's team (assuming that team is not all-inclusive of humanity) I will say only that you are bound to fail. To those who will fight for the whole truth and who will do so in a spirit of ultimate unity of humankind I extend my pledge to fight with you to the end. It may take more than one lifetime to win, but we cannot lose if we do not quit. I for one do not intend to quit, ever.

____

♠

Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero

WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force

To think just one year ago this is where we were! I even cite Uncle Fetzer! yeesh...

From: RT
To: Norman Finkelstein Subject: hola
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 00:36:17 -0500

have you seen the movie Loose Change? I'd love to know your
take.... unfortunately, our peace group is currently in disarray,
but i still hope you'll come speak at harvard (maybe you already
plan to?). i think your voice is needed here big time... peace

On 2/10/2006 10:07 AM, Norman Finkelstein wrote:

Almost never see movies. I'll be there when you need me.

From: RT
To: Norman Finkelstein Subject: Re: hola
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 10:45:45 -0500

it's a documentary dealing with the events of September 11, 2001-- it's rather remarkable and makes a strong case that the WTC was demolished... it has gained attention recently in part due to a new organization called Scholars for 9-11 Truth (www.st911.org)

If the conclusions drawn in the movie are true, then we are in for a national crisis as the "war on terror" will be exposed as a cover for the type of criminality FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds has been prevented by law from discussing, that is a global criminal nexus involving drugs, money laundering, and terrorism.

I was a victim of terrorism, of sorts, when I was 9 years old in 1984. My family was living in Bogotá (my father's first post in the Foreign Service) and a car bomb was detonated outside the embassy there--it was assumed that it had been placed by drug traffickers who had already threatended to kill one American in Colombia for every Colombian extradited under a new treaty. Except for my father, my family was evacuated and we waited in Miami for 6 months for our dad to rejoin us. In light of the revelations about 9-11 that I feel strongly are about to break into mainstream consciousness, I searched online for the first time for details of that car bomb in Bogota and found that all references everywhere essentially quoted or paraphrased this...

Nov 1984 A bomb attack on the US embassy in the Colombian capital Bogota kills a passerby. The explosion follows death threats against US officials from drug traffickers

I've yet to find any information on any claims of responsibility or results of investigations. I read the Holocaust Industry and was moved by your critique of the abuse of suffering. I cannot shake the feeling of being a pawn in a terribly cynical game... am I wrong? aren't we all such pawns as long as our memories are fabricated?

best,
RT

On 2/10/2006 1:00 PM, Norman Finkelstein wrote

Sounds much weird to me.

From: RT
To: Norman Finkelstein Subject: once more the crimson
Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2006 12:50:20 -0400

Dear Prof. Finkelstein,

As you may already be aware, there's another typical crimson article about the Walt/Mearsheimer paper on the Israel lobby, including of course Dershowitz's absurd rebuttal finding fault with (of all things) their footnotes, and the obligatory reference to you....

I comment on it in a blog:

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Any chance you've had a change of heart on 9-11? That debate suffers the same kind of attacks Dershowitz levels at W and M... since some neo-nazis make some of the same claims and cite some of the same sources as 9-11 truth folks (myself included,) critics focus on that instead of the issues, unanswered questions, official lies, etc. Very convenient to some, but of course ultimately quite a disservice to the needed public debate. We're getting to a point where anything that neo-nazis say, even if it's true, must at all costs be asserted to be false. Quite frankly, this is getting very tiresome and frightening.

You of all people should understand how our reluctance to depart from our intellectual comfort zones can have a very malignant blindering effect. Once more, I'll urge you to examine the case for 9-11 being an inside job. As most recently evidenced by Charlie Sheen's outing himself as a 911 truth activist, doubt is growing among Americans over bin Laden's and muslims' responsibility for the crime, and suspicion is growing that "pro-Israel" elements of the American right wing were involved. We can't afford for this issue to be framed as "pro-Jewish" / "anti-Jewish", which as a result of the absurdity of so many aspects the government's official account, is clearly the tactic that some have adopted. The 911 truth movement, like any other, is composed of a diversity of viewpoints, some unfortunately less constructive than others. Allowing the debate to be framed as some appear to want it framed is the worst thing that could happen, but reluctance to examine the facts by cool heads may well preclude a more rational approach at this point.

If after examining the case, you still feel confident of bin Laden's guilt, so be it, but please try to keep as open a mind as you would hope for from your readers and would-be readers!

best,

RT

From: "Norman Finkelstein" To: RT
Subject: RE: once more the crimson
Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2006 15:26:23 -0400

We're living in difficult times. It's important to preserve our sanity and clarity of thought.

From: RT
To: Norman Finkelstein Subject: Re: once more the crimson
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 09:56:49 -0400

I agree completely. My own sanity and clarity of thought (and that
of many others) depends on knowing the truth about things as
important as what happened on 9-11. It is clear that some people
are trying to frame that issue by both insinuating and directly
stating those who question the official account do so because they
are neo-nazi sympathizers. When 84% of 40,000 respondents to a CNN
online poll agree that the administration is hiding the truth about
9-11 (and with good reason) smearing the movement as anti-semitic
begins to look a bit like a desperate and cynical attempt to frame
the debate in a counterproductive way. Do we really want to let a
"9-11 Industry" develop around an actual hoax? Who exactly will
that help?

From: "Norman Finkelstein" To: RT
Subject: RE: once more the crimson
Date: 4/10/2006 12:16 PM

It seems that 9-11 is set to become your Kennedy Assassination industry. It's a waste of energy, I think.

From: RT
To: Norman Finkelstein Subject: eureka?
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 22:51:06 -0400

"...once before i deferred to authority and the authority was
wrong."

well said. i'm trying to figure out if you've looked at the
evidence and found it lacking, or if you really think the idea that
9-11 was an inside job is too crazy to even contemplate. i
completely understand any reservations you might have in responding
to that in an email, so no worries. speaking of not deferring to
authority, below is my 9/11 message to the dean of FAS, with his
response (any idea what "a historian's historian" is?)

Dear Bill,

I write in response to your message to alumni, a message I took to
be one of reassurance that our alma mater, "rocked" as it is
purported to have been by recent "upheaval", remains as ever solidly
afloat and on course. My own first impression, as indicated by the
terms in quotes above, is that in my view and the words of Mark
Twain, reports of Harvard's demise have been greatly exaggerated.
There, I'm afraid, must end the niceties. While I have no doubt
that Harvard will continue to weather the storms of previous and
future summers, my real concerns over this place extend to terms
beyond the nautical, and into the more sordid realm, if analogies
must be employed, of the pathological with regard to this great
meta-organism of thought, knowledge, and truth.

Analogies need not always be employed, though, nor the words of
great men. I'll risk indulging the latter one last time however,
and recall to you the words of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., who
said in reference to the conflict in Vietnam, that there comes a
time when silence is betrayal. And silent we have all been, for far
too long at Harvard and beyond with regard to the precarious state
of our world and of Harvard's integrity as a beacon of truth within
it.

Now well into my tenth non-consecutive year at Harvard, now more
administrator than student, but still an alumnus with an interest in
the meaning of my degree, I grow ever more disillusioned by the day
with the role of Harvard in national and world affairs. Many things
that we may not like about any large institution are to be
expected, and most often in my view accepted to the extent that the
core mission and purpose of the thing is preserved. I worry that
Harvard's little pathologies have, on the other hand, caused to
emerge an unhealthy and really quite damaging propensity on the part
of this institution to serve, as any student of Harvard's history
can attest is nothing particularly new or shocking, as the enabler
of some of the most ill-advised agendas of the world's elite.

I don't think it will shock you if I make the observation that in
its quest for an endlessly growing endowment (and the nice things
that brings) Harvard has consistently accepted money from a range of
questionable sources, and though it's been remarked to me that in
the view of some past luminaries we should take the approach that
(and I paraphrase) once the money reaches Harvard it is clean, I
find that to be a conveniently disingenuous attitude and one that
strengthens my conviction that Harvard's Veritas shield has been
unable to protect it from the rot of mammon.

It cannot be otherwise, it seems to me, because there can be no
other explanation for the betraying silence on the part of Harvard's
faculty, the guardians of truth, with regard to the charade of the
last five years or so, that charade being of course the so-called
Global War on Terror. Over the last five years Harvard has played a
role par excellence not of truth-seeker but of the enabler of lies
upon lies that have us standing at the edge of a dark abyss. Under
Harvard's less than watchful eye the American government has been
hijacked and subsequently run roughshod across the globe, trampling
hundreds of thousands of innocents underfoot, in a quest to dominate
on behalf of the world's powerful the lives, fortunes, and destinies
of those less so.

These actions, sanctioned as they have been by varying complicity
and inaction on the part of Harvard's great thinkers and leaders,
have been predicated on one of the greatest crimes of history, and
here is where the silence must end if we are not all, you and I and
the Harvard name to betray everything for which we claim to stand.
The crimes in question occured on September 11th, 2001, and they
were perpetrated not, as Harvard has so willingly acceded to, by
elements of a radical Islamic movement, but by elements within our
own country.
Before you dismiss these views (though perhaps I assume too much) I
would direct you to the work of a rapidly growing association of
scholars of which I'm proud to have recently become a
member--Scholars for 9-11 Truth. Results of the research of its
founding members, BYU Professor of Physics Steven Jones and
University of Minnesota McKnight Professor James Fetzer can be found
on the group's website, www.st911.org. I encourage you to become
familiar with their work, in particular for starters with the work
of Prof. Jones in analyzing the collapse of the twin towers and the
47 story WTC building 7, which shows beyond question that the
official explanation given for the events that began with the towers
being struck by airplanes bears reexamination in light of a
substantial body of evidence, including eyewitness acounts of
members of the FDNY that there were multiple explosions in the
towers before and while they fell, a fact seemingly overlooked by
the official 9-11 Commission report authored under the direction of
a close Bush administration ally Philip Zelikow, to whom Harvard
provided a forum at the Kennedy School's IOP not long ago.

There is a 40 minute video available at www.911revisited.com that
provides an excellent account of news footage, most of it never
played on television after that day, and the results of subsequent
investigations by a dedicated and tireless body of volunteer
researchers from around the world. I urge you to at least watch the
video, as it will shed some light on why I have been moved to write
to you about this. I fully intend to pursue this issue with every
ounce of energy I have, and will not shy away from bringing
attention to my status as a graduate of Harvard College and member
of Harvard's administrative staff. I have tried to work with
existing groups on campus to bring attention to these issues and
have met much by way of psychological resistance to even cursory
examinations of the evidence to which I refer you in this email. It
is my understanding that in certain cases the University or FAS will
grant recognition to affinity groups that would normally require
active student participation, and I hereby make the request for such
recognition to form a group on campus dedicated to the pursuit of
the truth surrounding the events of September 11th, perhaps under
the auspices of Scholars for 9-11 Truth but independently if need
be. This recognition would be needed in order to secure space on
campus for lectures and other events, and for the right to poster on
campus bulletin boards. I make this request humbly but with
conviction, and hope we can discuss it in person at some time in the
near future.

You may not recall, Bill, but at the end of an Asia Center event
several years back, we chatted briefly on our way out of the Faculty
Club about the effect that modern methods of documenting history
would have on the discipline into the future. I don't think there
was much elaboration on the subject at the time, but the question
has burned inside of me to this day--does the writing of history
have power over the truth? I cannot accept that, and hope with all
my heart you can see why.

Thank you for your time, and for the admirable way you have recently
stood for principle under fire. You and the rest of the faculty
continue to be an inspiration to me as I approach my tenth year as a
Harvard alumnus.

With warmest regards,

RT

William Kirby wrote:

Dear RT,

Thanks very much for writing--and indeed for reading the letter in
the first place!

I have not myself followed the 9-11 debates to the degree that you
have, so I am unfamiliary with much of this material. However, on
the question of the 9-11 commission, I have more confidence in it
knowing that one of our colleagues, Professor May, was one of the
members and authors of its report. He is a historian's historian.

I want to thank you also for your very kind words. I look foward to
seeing you much more often after my return to civilian life.

With all the best,

Bill

From: "Norman Finkelstein" To: RT
Subject: RE: once more the crimson
I've not looked into the matter closely, nor do I consider it a wise investment of my time. I wouldn't put it past George Bush senior to have his dearly beloved wife Barbara knocked off - crimes of passion do happen especially if your wife looks twice your age - but I don't think Bush junior would blow up the hub of the world financial network.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: RT
To: /Norman Finkelstein Subject: /did you hear about this Zogby poll?/
Date: /Fri, 02 Jun 2006 14:25:24 -0400/

Dear Prof. Finkelstein,

Just thought I'd write yet again to pester you on the
subject of 9/11. In case you weren't aware, a recent Zogby poll
commissioned by 911truth.org found that 42% of Americans believe the
government is covering up what really happened on 9/11. I know
you think this issue is a waste of your time, but since
approximately 70 million Americans don't agree (and the number is
growing every day) I was hoping you would at least consider
expressing publicly (on your website) your reasons for believing the case
being made by the 9/11 truth community is without merit.
Maintaining a willful ignorance and silence on the
subject seems a bit silly at this point--9/11 has been without a doubtthe
single most important historical event since the fall of the
Soviet Union, and instead of showing signs of fading ino the
vast American memory hole concerns are actually spreading
online and in the streets that the official story is a completefabrication.
I wonder what skeptics like yourself make of this--mass
delusion? An extremely clever propaganda campaign?
Given that the former must be the case either way, i.e. roughly half of
Americans MUST at this point be deluding themselves as to the accuracy
of the official version of events, which side do you honestly
think has the more sophisticated propaganda machine working for
it?
Again, I urge you to consider this issue and lend your
credibility to one side or another. I guarantee you will find
yourself compelled to do so rather soon, whatever your feelings.
I feel very strongly that you will be glad you did.
All the best,

RT

[note how many people were not aware of the collapse on
9/11 of WTC building 7, which no plane ever hit and seems
clearly to have been demolished intentionally. how do you think the
overall numbers will change when more do learn about WTC7? do
YOU know about WTC7?]

http://zogby.com/features/features.dbm?ID=231

Norman Finkelstein wrote:

Dear RT, I'm sure you are a very smart and terrific
fellow, so I won't even consider writing a flippant, let alone
insulting, response. But please bear in mind that about 70% of
Americans believe in the Devil as well as a Heaven and Hell, not to
mention the 50% who still believe that Saddam Hussein was behind
9/11. These sorts of "referendums" don't really prove much.

Best, Norm

------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: RT
To: /Norman Finkelstein Subject: /Re: did you hear about this Zogby poll?/
Date: /Sat, 03 Jun 2006 23:17:06 -0400/

Hi Norm,

Thanks for sparing me from whatever witty tongue-lashing you
had in mind. :) Look, people believe in heaven and hell and the
devil because it makes them feel secure and existentially sound.
Similarly it was a comforting thought to think that Saddam, who
we would "deal with" was behind 9/11. No one actually* wants*
to believe that they have been so disconnected from reality by
the media and their representatives in government that insiders
could pull off such a brazen lie under their noses. Yet that is
exactly the conclusion more and more people are reaching. Surely
Americans are not known for their masochism too?

But that psychological analysis, however correct I believe it
to be, is secondary to the enormous body of physical and
circumstantial evidence pointing to the ugly truth. I realize that you are
of the mindset that things that do not seem possible or likely in
the world as you perceive it must not be true, and as such your error
is similar to that of those who believe in heaven and hell and
all that other good stuff. I too am trying not to be flippant here,
believe me, and having led you to the water have no plans nor the
ability to make you drink. At the most I will pour buckets of cold
water over your head, like this one. If indeed you are comfortable with
your position, then you must accept that WTC building 7, the third
building to collapse on 9/11 (at 5:20 p.m.) was not
demolished on purpose. I know you've said you don't watch movies, but the
attached videos are no more than 30 seconds in total. If you
believe, as the owner of the building and the Bush
administration would have you, that fire and some unspecified structural
damage caused this building's complete collapse as observed, then
you are in fact ahead of the game, since the government itself has
been unable to complete its report on building 7's collapse for
lack of even a marginally credible theory as to how that could have
been the case. But then, maybe your computer will be unable to open the
videos, or you just don't have thetime. If you succeed, though, in
watching them or have in fact already seen them, I would be curious to
know your thoughts!

Best,

RT

Norman Finkelstein wrote:

Buddy, I squandered much of my youth wondering who killed JFK. It seems every generation needs an unresolved mystery to tickle its fancy: yours is the Twin Towers.

From: RT
To: Norman Finkelstein Subject: Re: did you hear about this Zogby poll?
Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2006 05:54:47 -0400

As I said, I can't force you to drink here, but at least acknowledge
that it's not just the twin towers--building number 7 isn't at all
like back and to the left, and 9/11 is not going down as another
JFK. also, this is hardly something that is tickling my fancy--it
is more akin to your discovery of the Joan Peters fraud--a
realization that if we don't think for ourselves we are apt to be
misled and whats worse, allow others to be misled. There is no
mystery to 9-11 except the one in people's imagination. The owner
of the buildings is clearly guilty of insurance fraud at the very
least.

On the risk of sounding like your therapist, is it possible that the
skepticism ingrained in you by the JFK episode led you to doggedly
question well attested "facts" in your later research and as such
your time was not squandered? And to make this even more personal
(I'm nothing if not impertinent) is it possible that a source of

your reluctance in this matter is the fear that perhaps your own
iconoclasm, worthy as it is, will be overshadowed by the revelations
to be found in the exposition of the official 9-11 narrative as a
monumental lie? I'm sorry, I know a lot more about 9-11 than I do
about Norman Finkelstein, but you seem rather too perspicacious to
really be this incurious. If your wish is to discourage me from
squandering my youth I fear you're too late. The sentiment is
appreciated however, and mutual, since I want nothing more than to
help you avoid squandering your, um, golden years in blind alleys of false consciousness when there is so much more for you to contribute
to the formation of a new generation of intellectuals.

Norman Finkelstein wrote:

"golden years in blind alleys of false consciousness": this is a phrase I'll savor until my golden years roll into my grave.

I replied after that, basically to say Sayonara, I tried! The rest is history.

____

♠

Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero

WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force