Shep Smith: Journalists are not the enemy of the people

@camlok,

Quote:

The FBI, the CIA, the NSA, the all the silly acronyms y'all have do not hire the best. They hire those who have no morals, they hire those that will torture and murder anyone they are told to. They only hire those who love to drop to their knees and slurp.

Yep, in other words "psychopaths". Yep, we are really ruled by the criminaly insane! Hence all the wars, the shortage, death and destruction, demonizing the good things in life, like CO2!(=live giving!), Yep, we are literally ruled by 'The Cult of Death". And no, of course they don't have our best interests at heart.
(Anyway, their heart is closed anyway.)

Just what John Lennon said, but his death has nothing to with that. Just a coincidence, right?!

0 Replies

@vikorr,

Quote:

You will get a response about how evasive you are...

That would be because all you did was evade. You evaded hard, indisputable science, like the total free fall of WTC7, something which can ONLY happen with a controlled demolition.

When this and other total impossibilities of the USGOCT were given to you, you absolutely froze and you, none of you would even mention these things.

That is evasion on a total scale, vikorr, Setanta, livinglava, CI, glitterbag, farmerman, all you silent A2Kers, all you MSM, all you "honest" people, ... .

You and living lava both attempted to divert from these impossibilities of the USGOCT with inane arguments that these same evil people who lied just couldn't do something like this, that a conspiracy this large couldn't be hidden, ... all of these things you both raised illustrated your evasiveness and your totally dishonest natures.

When there are so many 100% real smoking guns, honest people, people who aren't congenitally evasive address these TOTAL IMPOSSIBILITIES of the USGOCT.

And again, NO ONE has ever provided one shred of evidence for the USGOCT, not the MSM, and certainly not vikorr, livinglava, Setanta, farmerman [reputedly a scientist], ... .

Everyone runs from the overwhelming evidence, everyone keeps on attacking those who simply point out the science and the facts from over 3,000 professional architects and engineers, thousands more scientists.

As AE911Truth notes, there are not 3,000 architects and engineers who are supporting the USGOCT, there are virtually none. Link for us, if you will, you "honest" folks who blindly support the total failure, the USGOCT, all the architects and engineers who actively support the USGOCT.

There aren't thousands more scientists who support the USGOCT, they are next to none. Link for us, if you will, you "honest" folks who blindly support the total failure, the USGOCT, all the scientists who actively support the USGOCT.

The odd professional person that has supported the USGOCT have all had their science and their arguments totally shut down by hard, indisputable science, scientific experiments and the facts.

"It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong." - Richard P. Feynman

Now, in video. Hopefully, this will remind those who have forgotten, those who remain willfully blind, just how science works.

Feynman Chaser - The Key to Science

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b240PGCMwV0

NONE of the scientists, architects or engineers' science has stood up to experiment, the arbiter of science. Everything ever put forward by RELIABLE supporters of the USGOCT has been proven wrong, by experiment!!

All the impossibilities of the USGOCT, the molten/vaporized WTC steel, the US nanothermite, the free fall, the accelerating collapses of the twin towers, the ... all sink the USGOCT.

It has nothing, zilch, not anything to support it.

There is no MSM person who will actively defend the USGOCT. Notice how any "defense" is always just personally attacking the truth tellers. Notice how, just like all those here who "defend" the USGOCT, there is NEVER any evidence offered to support the government fable.

All there is, all there has ever been here at A2K and in the MSM, ... , are personal attacks on the truth tellers.

Is there any more of a clear example of the MSM/... being total enemies of the people?

1 Reply

@camlok,

camlok wrote:

Again with your lies. You, and vikorr, wanted to discuss it and did until you both quickly realized you had zilch in your quiver, no evidence at all. Still you both went on and on with your inane theories, even more inane distractions and diversions.

No intention to distract or divert from anything. You know, people can discuss things from their own POVs sincerely without it necessarily being a conspiratorial effort to avert truth.

Quote:

Grow up, grow some balls and address the science and the facts like adults should.

I read what you said about internal thermite or whatever being necessary because otherwise the steel wouldn't have reached its melting point. My response was:
1) If you are right, then it is possible that people inside the building or others who worked there but weren't in it that day could have been in on it. This is a possibility but I'm not pointing any fingers or suggesting there needs to be an investigation.
2) My sense of the physics is that heat rises and there was a lot of jet fuel and so between the rising heat and downward pressure of embers and other hot material from above, the melting point of the steel could have been reached.

When a blacksmith softens a piece of iron, the process involves heating and blowing air on it, and hammering it as well. Heat moves around in acoustic waves, so stress could have added enough pressure to the steel to cause it to soften at the temperatures reached by the burning fuel.

Now please don't respond anymore by challenging me to say whether I am calling some other people 'liars.' I have not paid that close attention to the 9/11 history so I really don't know who has said what and, to be honest, I really don't want to get into debating others about it, especially if there is some kind of conspiracy where challenging the official lie is apt to trigger repressive violence. Ultimately, truth can sometimes not go beyond the personal relationship between the individual and God. It is sad that the whole world doesn't believe in "the truth sets you free," but the reality is that many don't and it's not worth getting killed to argue with liars who are also bullies.

1 Reply

@camlok,

vikorr wrote:

You will get a response about how evasive you are...

camlok wrote:

That would be because all you did was evade.

You see a lot of ulterior motives and conspiracies around. I directed my quote at Living for a purpose (see below), and in reality, even if this post is replying to you, my hope is that Living reads this and understands.

My quote was directed at Living because he/she has already been warned about your behaviour, and your posts since have have backed up those warnings. Unfortunately Living has continued to feed your fixation. My quote was yet another attempt to have Living not engage you on 9-11 so this thread can get back on track. You've shown you won't abide by forum etiquette (posting in appropriate threads), hopefully Living will.

1 Reply

@livinglava,

Quote:

No intention to distract or divert from anything. You know, people can discuss things from their own POVs sincerely without it necessarily being a conspiratorial effort to avert truth.

Your POV has zero merit. When you are faced with so many impossibilities in the USGOCT that make that narrative impossible, and you don't address those impossibilities, all you are doing is distractions and diversions.

US government nanothermite MEANS no hijackers, it means that elements of the US government planned and blew up three towers murdering 2,996 westerners, who you obviously do not care about.

WTC7 free fall MEANS no hijackers, it means that elements of the US government planned and blew up three towers murdering 2,996 westerners, who you obviously do not care about.

Univ of Alaska study says NIST has zero chance of being right about WTC7 MEANS no hijackers, it means that elements of the US government planned and blew up three towers murdering 2,996 westerners, who you obviously do not care about.

Molten/vaporized WTC structural steel MEANS no hijackers, it means that elements of the US government planned and blew up three towers murdering 2,996 westerners, who you obviously do not care about.

Explain how your POV can rationalize these impossibilities of the USGOCT.

Quote:

I read what you said about internal thermite NANOTHERMITE or whatever being necessary because otherwise the steel wouldn't have reached its melting point. My response was:
1) If you are right, then it is possible that people inside the building or others who worked there but weren't in it that day could have been in on it. This is a possibility but I'm not pointing any fingers or suggesting there needs to be an investigation.

No hijackers, which means the USGOCT is a total lie. How did anyone but the government in power get a hold of US nanothermite?

Quote:

2) My sense of the physics is that heat rises and there was a lot of jet fuel and so between the rising heat and downward pressure of embers and other hot material from above, the melting point of the steel could have been reached.

Forgive me but you have no sense of physics. You could have jet fuel, wood, coal, ... delivered to the scene of the fire and it could burn for months, years, ... and it could NEVER melt, let alone vaporize the steel.

Melt point of steel 1500C/2800 F

Vaporization point of steel 2700C/4900F

Maximum WTC temperatures 750-800C/1472F

Maximum temps 700C/1300F below melt point of steel.

Maximum temps 2000C/4100F below vaporization point of steel.

Quote:

The maximum flame temperature increase for burning hydrocarbons (jet fuel) in air is, thus, about 1,000°C—hardly sufficient to melt steel at 1,500°C. But it is very difficult to reach this maximum temperature with a diffuse flame.

...

However, it is highly unlikely that the steel at the WTC experienced temperatures above the 750–800°C/1,472F range. All reports that the steel melted at 1,500°C/2,700F are using imprecise terminology at best.

https://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/jom/0112/eagar/eagar-0112.html

WTC structural steel was insulated so it could never reach any critical temperature. UL did tests on full WTC floor systems in a furnace with no insulation on steel members and there was no failure.

There wasn't a lot of jet fuel, the vast majority of it was gone in the explosion. The buildings were designed to take the impact of a fully loaded 707 and they did.

The collapses were impossible for the USGOCT because they accelerated as they fell. That goes against Newton's Laws. The tower on WTC1 fell before the building started to move. That means that the central core columns were blown out first.

There are pictures of Edna Citron standing in the gaping hole of WTC 1 right at the outside edge. How could she do this with the temperatures you mistakenly think were there?

9-11-01, 10:09 Edna Cintron still waves for 9/11 help - FOX 911 WTC1 Closeup

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZUtpKeHhAM

Quote:

When a blacksmith softens a piece of iron, the process involves heating and blowing air on it, and hammering it as well. Heat moves around in acoustic waves, so stress could have added enough pressure to the steel to cause it to soften at the temperatures reached by the burning fuel.

"blowing air on it" results in higher temperatures. Such was not the case at WTC on 9/11.

Heat DOES NOT move around in acoustic waves!!!

Had that SCENARIO happened, it didn't happen because it couldn't happen, the building would not have collapsed symmetrically as it did, the building would not have accelerated, as it did, there would be no molten/vaporized steel, which there was, the seismic record wouldn't show huge subterranean explosions, it does.

Huge multi ton wall sections could not have been blown out a football field away because in a gravity collapse there is no extra energy to do this. That huuuuuuge amount of extra energy came from the high explosives that were used to bring down the buildings.

George W Bush described the massive explosions that occurred in the twin towers before they were blown up. Hundreds of firemen reported myriad explosions. Reporters and eyewitnesses also reported huge explosions.

So why do you still try to deny reality, especially when you have no knowledge of the science or the facts?

1 Reply

@vikorr,

Quote:

You see a lot of ulterior motives and conspiracies around.

What does this inanity have to do with anything?

You believe in a totally wacky US government conspiracy theory, for which you have never provided any evidence.

Yet you ignore volumes of evidence, volumes of total impossibilities in the USGOCT and go to your false nonsense about this not being what this thread is about.

As I stated, this is the prime example of MSM being the enemy of the people.

Anyone who ignores this amount of evidence can only be a liar of monstrous proportions.

1 Reply

@camlok,

camlok wrote:

US government nanothermite MEANS no hijackers, it means that elements of the US government planned and blew up three towers murdering 2,996 westerners, who you obviously do not care about.

1) There is no reason individuals employed in US government positions couldn't have been involved with causing the attack by means of employing hijackers. So the two hypotheses are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Both could have also been procured together, like the way JFK seems to have been shot from multiple angles simultaneously to guarantee a hit/kill.

Quote:

WTC7 free fall MEANS no hijackers, it means that elements of the US government planned and blew up three towers murdering 2,996 westerners, who you obviously do not care about.

Don't say that. Human beings die all the time, as do other living entities, and we simply can't police all the injustice that happens to everyone and everything everywhere. People are responsible for policing themselves according to their consciences, and when they fail we can try to induce justice externally, but a lot of justice doesn't get served until the hereafter.

Quote:

No hijackers, which means the USGOCT is a total lie. How did anyone but the government in power get a hold of US nanothermite?

I highly doubt that there is any explosive, poison, etc. that can't be synthesized by non-governmental people if they are willing to take the risk.

Quote:

Forgive me but you have no sense of physics. You could have jet fuel, wood, coal, ... delivered to the scene of the fire and it could burn for months, years, ... and it could NEVER melt, let alone vaporize the steel.

Melt point of steel 1500C/2800 F

Vaporization point of steel 2700C/4900F

Maximum WTC temperatures 750-800C/1472F

Maximum temps 700C/1300F below melt point of steel.

Maximum temps 2000C/4100F below vaporization point of steel.

Do you know how a pressure-cooker works? The steam is contained within a compression-chamber and that amplifies the pulverizing effect of the water molecules on the food. When you have so much weight and thus pressure bearing down on steel, this could amplify the pulverizing effect of heat within the steel as well. There would also be a lot of internal reverberation of energy within the steel grid because a hot mass of steel that size can't radiate heat/energy away as fast as something smaller like a furnace can when it is the same temperature burning the same fuel.

Quote:

The maximum flame temperature increase for burning hydrocarbons (jet fuel) in air is, thus, about 1,000°C—hardly sufficient to melt steel at 1,500°C. But it is very difficult to reach this maximum temperature with a diffuse flame.

Think about the difference between burning jet fuel in an open fireplace or a closed/contained furnace. If pressure builds up within the furnace, it can cause the fuel to combust at hotter temperatures. The limiting factor would be the feed-in rate of oxygen, I think, and maybe the efficiency of wind-turbulence circulating the fuel-air mixture within and around the building. If a vacuum was occurring within the building, it could suck air/fuel in from outside and cause a compression-explosion, sort of like a supernova but not nuclear, obviously. I'm not claiming to be an expert, but please think about there being a lot of potential for complex mechanics in a situation as large as the one you are studying.

...

However, it is highly unlikely that the steel at the WTC experienced temperatures above the 750–800°C/1,472F range. All reports that the steel melted at 1,500°C/2,700F are using imprecise terminology at best.

https://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/jom/0112/eagar/eagar-0112.html
[/quote]

Quote:

There wasn't a lot of jet fuel, the vast majority of it was gone in the explosion. The buildings were designed to take the impact of a fully loaded 707 and they did.

The second plane could have been to deliver more fuel. Maybe the planners thought about that.

Quote:

The collapses were impossible for the USGOCT because they accelerated as they fell. That goes against Newton's Laws. The tower on WTC1 fell before the building started to move. That means that the central core columns were blown out first.

Pressure/vacuum effects from the combustion?

Quote:

There are pictures of Edna Citron standing in the gaping hole of WTC 1 right at the outside edge. How could she do this with the temperatures you mistakenly think were there?

Because inward drafts were bringing more cold air into the building and preventing the heat from leaving?

9-11-01, 10:09 Edna Cintron still waves for 9/11 help - FOX 911 WTC1 Closeup

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZUtpKeHhAM

Quote:

When a blacksmith softens a piece of iron, the process involves heating and blowing air on it, and hammering it as well. Heat moves around in acoustic waves, so stress could have added enough pressure to the steel to cause it to soften at the temperatures reached by the burning fuel.

Quote:

Heat DOES NOT move around in acoustic waves!!!

If you heat up a lump of iron until it glows on one end and then hammer it, doesn't that cause the heat to reverberate from the glowing part to the cooler part? Is it that different from shaking a bottle of water with concentrated dye at the bottom to cause the dye to diffuse through the rest of the water quicker?

Quote:

Huge multi ton wall sections could not have been blown out a football field away because in a gravity collapse there is no extra energy to do this. That huuuuuuge amount of extra energy came from the high explosives that were used to bring down the buildings.

George W Bush described the massive explosions that occurred in the twin towers before they were blown up. Hundreds of firemen reported myriad explosions. Reporters and eyewitnesses also reported huge explosions.

So why do you still try to deny reality, especially when you have no knowledge of the science or the facts?

I'm just exploring what seem to be logical possibilities from my mind's POV. I am not claiming to have a conclusive hypothesis. You may be right, for all I know; but I can't be convinced beyond a doubt because too many impossibly difficult experiments would be needed to do so. Now, if you could rebuild the buildings and recreate the attacks to test your hypothesis, I think that would be quite convincing, although you might not be able to replicate the exact weather conditions and other aspects, such as the contents of the buildings and their contribution to the fire, or the exact internal aerodynamics of the building, especially after the plane(s) impacted and penetrated them in the exact way that they did.

I'm sorry. I'm really not trying to obfuscate as you might suspect. I am just trying to think about all the possibilities and there are just so many with any system, let alone a system this large and complex.

1 Reply

@camlok,

Quote:

What does this inanity have to do with anything?

The implication is quite clear. In relation to other people, your mind makes up things that don't exist.

0 Replies

@livinglava,

Have you seen any of your reasoning accepted by Camlok? I haven't. Not with you. Not with anyone else that has issues with his perspectives. Do you honestly believe he will accept anything you offer that could undermine his views?

Why not let this thread get back to it's original topic. If you don't engage Camlok in 9-11, he won't bombard the thread (quite so much)

3 Replies

@vikorr,

vikorr wrote:

Have you seen any of your reasoning accepted by Camlok? I haven't. Not with you. Not with anyone else that has issues with his perspectives. Do you honestly believe he will accept anything you offer that could undermine his views?

Why not let this thread get back to it's original topic. If you don't engage Camlok in 9-11, he won't bombard the thread (quite so much)

Alright, I see your point. I thought I could expand his perspective by adding some additional possibilities to the theorizing, but he may just be bent on accusing others of adhering to official narratives and less on thinking through actual aspects of the reality he's trying to understand. Either way, 9/11 discussion should take place within a 9/11 thread and this thread is about the more recent issue, raised by Pr. Trump, that journalism is working against the public interest.

1 Reply

@vikorr,

Quote:

Have you seen any of your reasoning accepted by Camlok? I haven't. Not with you. Not with anyone else that has issues with his perspectives

You keep on with your blatant lies, vikorr. You keep pretending that these indisputable facts don't exist. You all show just how ignorant you are, non pejorative meaning until you refuse to accept facts and science, then it becomes willful ignorance, ignorance based on delusion or worse.

What can you not understand about there being molten/vaporized WTC steel which means that there were no Arab hijackers?

What can you not understand about you, Setanta, farmerman, a scientist no less, living lava, ... none of you being able to give any evidence for the USGOCT?

Just address those two questions.

Quote:

Do you honestly believe he will accept anything you offer that could undermine his views?

Again, vikorr, why are you continuing with your patent dishonest?

These are not "views", these are the findings, backed by experiment, the arbiter of science, of 3,000 plus architects and engineers, a three year study by a top forensic engineer with over 30 years of experience.

Please explain why you can hold to such falsehoods when you have zero expertise and you are presented with indisputable science by thousands of experts.

0 Replies

@livinglava,

Quote:

I thought I could expand his perspective by adding some additional possibilities to the theorizing,

How do you expect that your theorizing can add anything to the voluminous science and the many indisputable facts that support AE911Truth's position and totally destroy the US governments' stories when you are so deeply ignorant of the science and the evidence?

Willfully so, even after you have been shown your offerings have no merit.

Your silly theories have been knocked flat. By science, and reality, which you, Vikorr, Setanta, farmerman, ... refuse to address or face up to.

Quote:

but he may just be bent on accusing others of adhering to official narratives and less on thinking through actual aspects of the reality he's trying to understand.

I am flat out accusing you folks of not facing reality.

I have proven that time and again that your position has no merit, as have you all by your refusal to address all the evidence that sinks the USGOCT.

Still not one piece of evidence has ever been put forward for the USGOCT by any of you.

Your patent dishonesty is so clear because you all refuse to address the myriad impossibilities that are found in the evidence that destroys the USGOCT.

Quote:

Either way, 9/11 discussion should take place within a 9/11 thread and this thread is about the more recent issue, raised by Pr. Trump, that journalism is working against the public interest.

You folks are really shameless liars. The thread is,

Shep Smith: Journalists are not the enemy of the people

and everything I am discussing is right on that point. Smith and all the rest of the lying MSM are covering up the murders of 2,996 westerners, as are you all, the totally brainwashed folks who have nothing whatsoever to support you/their position.

Your dishonesty in effecting this cover up is so patently obvious because of the refusal of all of you to honestly address the science and the evidence.

This represents on your [plural and widespread] part either grand delusion or deep deep evil.

1 Reply

@vikorr,

Quote:

Have you seen any of your reasoning accepted by Camlok?

See, you are discussing it. With your every sentence you illustrate your grand hypocrisy, you illustrate that your desire is not to get to the truth but to bury it.

But your [plural] ignorance on the science, the facts, the evidence, leaves you [plural] only illustrating just how little you all know of the science, the facts, the evidence.

There has been NO reasoning, evidence, science from any of you, 'you' includes you, vikorr, just deception, distractions and diversions.

Really, have you no grasp of how evil this makes you all, MSM included, trying to cover this evil up when you are faced with volumes of science, evidence, ... that shows the story you pretend to believe is totally false and you can provide NOTHING to support that drivel?

0 Replies

@camlok,

camlok wrote:

How do you expect that your theorizing can add anything to the voluminous science and the many indisputable facts that support AE911Truth's position and totally destroy the US governments' stories when you are so deeply ignorant of the science and the evidence?

Because 1) I'm just having a discussion on an internet forum, not testifying before congress; 2) because if there is indeed conspiracy happening on the scale you suggest, then any or all the information you have to review could be misconstrued as decoys to obfuscate the pursuit of truth.

Quote:

Willfully so, even after you have been shown your offerings have no merit.

Ok, good then no more discussion.

Quote:

I am flat out accusing you folks of not facing reality.

Ok, you're entitled to your POV.

Quote:

You folks are really shameless liars. The thread is,

Shep Smith: Journalists are not the enemy of the people

and everything I am discussing is right on that point.

No, the thread is about journalistic bias toward supporting/propagating certain political goals. The media has become a battleground for swaying public opinion instead of a venue to provide the public with information so they can consider various POVs and think for themselves.

All they really need to do to right the wrong is to give fair consideration to different POVs and truly put effort into accurately representing why different parties/perspectives believe the way they do about various issues instead of automatically spinning their reporting in a way that implicitly criticizes what they're reporting on without explaining to their readers why some people sincerely believe/support those ideas/opinions.

You don't have to agree with, say, gun control to understand why certain people support it, how they think, and what they are doing to pursue political goals related to it. Likewise, you don't have to agree with gun rights to understand why certain people support and defend them, why they think society would be worse with less gun rights, etc. It's just a question of understanding the different perspectives on an issue and reporting on what is being done to pursue these different perspectives in policy, business, etc.

1 Reply

@livinglava,

Quote:

2) because if there is indeed conspiracy happening on the scale you suggest,

You know full well that the USGOCT is totally false. Yet you, none of you, will actually even mention all the myriad impossibilities that show the USGOCT is one big lie.

You express no anger or remorse that 19 innocent men have been falsely accused by the always lying US governments. Why?

You express no anger or remorse for the millions murdered by western governments all because of this USA false flag. Why?

You express no anger or remorse for the 2,996 westerners murdered by murdered by the US government. Why?

camlok: I am flat out accusing you folks of not facing reality.

Quote:

Ok, you're entitled to your POV.

Another lie. You, none of you have addressed the myriad impossibilities of the US fable so it is not my opinion, it is fact, You won't discuss these realities. That is you folks not facing reality.

Shep Smith: Journalists are not the enemy of the people

Quote:

No, the thread is about journalistic bias toward supporting/propagating certain political goals.

You can't even read. Journalists who help US governments to murder 2,996 of their "own" are the epitome of "Journalists being the enemy of the people".

Either you are totally delusional, and I say this not in anger or to hurt, or you are outright lying with each breath you take, each word you write because a rational, thinking person could not, would not avoid such stark realities as:

molten/vaporized steel, US proprietary nanothermite and the by products of that nanothermite in WTC dust, WTC7 free fall, no evidence for the USGOCT, the molten steel seen flowing from WTC2, the human blown out of a twin tower window by an explosion, the seismic record showing conclusively that there were huge explosions in the twin towers before the "planes" hit, the myriad NIST outright lies.

Why can't you address these things?

Why can't you provide any evidence for the USGOCT?

0 Replies

Trying to convince others of their beliefs in politics or religion is a contest of wills with no winners.

2 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

Trying to convince others of their beliefs in politics or religion is a contest of wills with no winners.

This has nothing to do with either politics or religion, ci, but your post is testament to your typically dishonest posts on this VERY important issue.

These are issue of science, facts and the rule of law, things that you and the vast vast majority of A2Kers care little about, know less about.

And then there are the truly evil ones who know full well that the USGOCT has not a leg to stand on and so so much evidence against it so as to make it a total impossibility.

But still those bald faced liars cling to their childish fantasies, secure in the comfort of their brainwashing.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

It isn't just the MSM who are the enemies of the people, enemies of the truth, enemies of science, ... , it is people like you, vikorr, ll, farmerman, Setanta, and all the other voices who are silent.

As Wayne Dyer described, the highest form of ignorance, coming from those who reject something they know little to nothing about.

Going beyond Dyer's description we have those who actually know and cover and support this deep kind of evil. Ask yourself, are you one of these kinds of people?

2 Replies

@camlok,

Lemme see if I have this right.....

Unless a post comes from YOU, it means everybody else is lying or too stupid to know "truth"?

Hmmm.

No.

You are entitled to your belief. But running rampant for pages upon pages makes a very tedious read. I bet you can't let five posts go by without butting in somehow. In fact, that's a challenge to you. Reading other view points, even if you don't agree with them, can lead to a discussion. Try it, you may just learn something new.

Or not.

2 Replies

@camlok,

I wonder why you bother trying to convince all these people that you consider to be liars, hypocrites, terrified, etc. Wouldn't that be an exercise in futility? (come to think of it, this post is probably an exercise in futility as well)

The only person who has remotely agreed with you is a fellow who showed up on the forums around the same time you did...spouting the same stuff you did....in almost the same style you did....what a coincidence !

2 Replies

Shep Smith: Journalists are not the enemy of the people

Quick Links

My Account

able2know