<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Debate, economy distract as political road bomb awaits</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/debate-distracts-while-road-bomb-awaits.htm/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/debate-distracts-while-road-bomb-awaits.htm</link>
	<description>Reviewing scientific paradigms and other general beliefs in the light of the scientific amd professional literature</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 29 Aug 2010 06:03:45 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Truthseeker</title>
		<link>http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/debate-distracts-while-road-bomb-awaits.htm/comment-page-1#comment-6141</link>
		<dc:creator>Truthseeker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 25 Oct 2008 06:05:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/debate-distracts-while-road-bomb-awaits.htm#comment-6141</guid>
		<description>The list stretches from New York to Niagara Falls, yet you cannot name one favorite?

Yes, prosecutors are often liars and abet lying and manage to railroad innocents into jail for ever and then when they are proved innocent, resist the correction, as my next post will record when I return from life ie Photoplus 2008.

Yes, the media are captives of their system, as we all are except the few outside any system, as are the distinguished personnel and resolute commentators of the Guardian of Science.

But what has that got to do with the price of bats flying around your belfry, my distinguished commentator?  

We requested evidence, and it appears you come up short.  Do we have to laboriously post a list of all the proper explanations of all the supposed mysteries of 9/11?

We are willing to do that but other vital topics must take priority.  To avoid confusion of topic, since this post concerns voting integrity, after all, not 9/11, perhaps you will allow us to start the post on 9/11 rebuttal with a couple of sentences and fill in later, and this important discussion can be moved there instead of forcing those printing out the comments on this post to waste paper (in their view) on the topic that concerns you, which is apparently your unlikely belief that those who occupy the top positions in US government and its executive can organize conspiracies of an intricate nature and vast consequence without being found out by any intern reporter on a provincial newspaper in Utah, which seems unlikely a priori but hey, always surprises in store as the planet rolls on in it as yet undisturbed orbit.

&lt;strong&gt;NOTICE:  This thread moved to &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/was-911-aided-and-abetted-by-heinous-brilliant-co-conspirators-in-federal-employ.htm&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;&lt;u&gt;Was 9/11 aided and abetted by heinous, brilliant co-conspirators in federal employ?&lt;/u&gt;&lt;/a&gt;, the new post on 9/11 theories, if you don&#039;t mind&lt;/strong&gt;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The list stretches from New York to Niagara Falls, yet you cannot name one favorite?</p>
<p>Yes, prosecutors are often liars and abet lying and manage to railroad innocents into jail for ever and then when they are proved innocent, resist the correction, as my next post will record when I return from life ie Photoplus 2008.</p>
<p>Yes, the media are captives of their system, as we all are except the few outside any system, as are the distinguished personnel and resolute commentators of the Guardian of Science.</p>
<p>But what has that got to do with the price of bats flying around your belfry, my distinguished commentator?  </p>
<p>We requested evidence, and it appears you come up short.  Do we have to laboriously post a list of all the proper explanations of all the supposed mysteries of 9/11?</p>
<p>We are willing to do that but other vital topics must take priority.  To avoid confusion of topic, since this post concerns voting integrity, after all, not 9/11, perhaps you will allow us to start the post on 9/11 rebuttal with a couple of sentences and fill in later, and this important discussion can be moved there instead of forcing those printing out the comments on this post to waste paper (in their view) on the topic that concerns you, which is apparently your unlikely belief that those who occupy the top positions in US government and its executive can organize conspiracies of an intricate nature and vast consequence without being found out by any intern reporter on a provincial newspaper in Utah, which seems unlikely a priori but hey, always surprises in store as the planet rolls on in it as yet undisturbed orbit.</p>
<p><strong>NOTICE:  This thread moved to <a href="http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/was-911-aided-and-abetted-by-heinous-brilliant-co-conspirators-in-federal-employ.htm" rel="nofollow"><u>Was 9/11 aided and abetted by heinous, brilliant co-conspirators in federal employ?</u></a>, the new post on 9/11 theories, if you don&#8217;t mind</strong>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Baby Pong</title>
		<link>http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/debate-distracts-while-road-bomb-awaits.htm/comment-page-1#comment-6140</link>
		<dc:creator>Baby Pong</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Oct 2008 15:31:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/debate-distracts-while-road-bomb-awaits.htm#comment-6140</guid>
		<description>&quot;Well Steve, perhaps you are in possession of evidence that some known or unknown branch of the US government gave them inside help, but it appears that the New York Times does not have it.&quot;

Did you ever serve on a jury, TS? Have you never seen a prosecutor discredit the testimony of someone who is a known and proven liar? Ah, yes, if the NYT had evidence, you imply, they would publish it, even salivate at the prospect, being part of a &quot;bloodhound media... eager to expose any such thing...&quot;

These really shows your disconnect with reality. First, the NYT are known and proven liars, as any good intellectual should know. The media are only eager to expose scandals that involve illicit sex by world leaders and other titillating matters that make good headlines but do not seriously threaten to overturn the established order. The media themselves are the biggest scandal of all, for most of the time they act as though they were state-controlled, faithfully parrotting government&#039;s self-serving stories, and do not dig to get at facts that would really stir the rabble to revolution.

The list of important stories they have censored would probably stretch from New York city to Crackley Falls, Maryland, were it set in 16 point justified Bodoni with 1-1/2 line spacing and 1/4 inch indents.

Okay, now I&#039;m sure you will change your fanciful thinking. You just needed a knock on the head.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Well Steve, perhaps you are in possession of evidence that some known or unknown branch of the US government gave them inside help, but it appears that the New York Times does not have it.&#8221;</p>
<p>Did you ever serve on a jury, TS? Have you never seen a prosecutor discredit the testimony of someone who is a known and proven liar? Ah, yes, if the NYT had evidence, you imply, they would publish it, even salivate at the prospect, being part of a &#8220;bloodhound media&#8230; eager to expose any such thing&#8230;&#8221;</p>
<p>These really shows your disconnect with reality. First, the NYT are known and proven liars, as any good intellectual should know. The media are only eager to expose scandals that involve illicit sex by world leaders and other titillating matters that make good headlines but do not seriously threaten to overturn the established order. The media themselves are the biggest scandal of all, for most of the time they act as though they were state-controlled, faithfully parrotting government&#8217;s self-serving stories, and do not dig to get at facts that would really stir the rabble to revolution.</p>
<p>The list of important stories they have censored would probably stretch from New York city to Crackley Falls, Maryland, were it set in 16 point justified Bodoni with 1-1/2 line spacing and 1/4 inch indents.</p>
<p>Okay, now I&#8217;m sure you will change your fanciful thinking. You just needed a knock on the head.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MacDonald</title>
		<link>http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/debate-distracts-while-road-bomb-awaits.htm/comment-page-1#comment-6138</link>
		<dc:creator>MacDonald</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Oct 2008 16:25:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/debate-distracts-while-road-bomb-awaits.htm#comment-6138</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;Any Federal Government involvement would have escalated it to a decent level commensurate with the ambitions of the dastardly planners of world domination or whatever.&lt;/i&gt;

I&#039;m not sure what you&#039;re gettign at here, TS 9/11 worked quite nicely for those dastardly planners of world domination. It ushered in an endless war against a phantom enemy plus Afghanistan, Iraq and soon Iran,  unbridled executive powers, accelerated erosion of all civil liberties, got Buch elected twice, and is the only reason McCain is not light years behind in the polls.

Whaddaya mean it wasn&#039;t enuff?

BY the way, why do we need somebody to come forward with evidence when the doting fools that runs the country spill the beans every time they forget to take their medicine on time?

If Rumsfeld himself told you that Flight 93 was shot down, would you believe it? If Bush told you that bombs inside the buildings were part of the terrorists&#039; plan, would that be convincing? Note, in the usual semantic mess that characterizes every Bush statement, there is an allusion to people trapped above not being allowed to escape. Guess which event.  How about 9/11 comission testimony saying that Cheney knew that.... whatever hit Pentagon was coming, but  declared that &quot;the order stands&quot; (obviosuly not the order to shoot the bugger down)? Here&#039;s the trinity for ya:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6Xoxaf1Al0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USnxe7hxP4I&amp;feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GO-9LQDFE2Y</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>Any Federal Government involvement would have escalated it to a decent level commensurate with the ambitions of the dastardly planners of world domination or whatever.</i></p>
<p>I&#8217;m not sure what you&#8217;re gettign at here, TS 9/11 worked quite nicely for those dastardly planners of world domination. It ushered in an endless war against a phantom enemy plus Afghanistan, Iraq and soon Iran,  unbridled executive powers, accelerated erosion of all civil liberties, got Buch elected twice, and is the only reason McCain is not light years behind in the polls.</p>
<p>Whaddaya mean it wasn&#8217;t enuff?</p>
<p>BY the way, why do we need somebody to come forward with evidence when the doting fools that runs the country spill the beans every time they forget to take their medicine on time?</p>
<p>If Rumsfeld himself told you that Flight 93 was shot down, would you believe it? If Bush told you that bombs inside the buildings were part of the terrorists&#8217; plan, would that be convincing? Note, in the usual semantic mess that characterizes every Bush statement, there is an allusion to people trapped above not being allowed to escape. Guess which event.  How about 9/11 comission testimony saying that Cheney knew that&#8230;. whatever hit Pentagon was coming, but  declared that &#8220;the order stands&#8221; (obviosuly not the order to shoot the bugger down)? Here&#8217;s the trinity for ya:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6Xoxaf1Al0" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6Xoxaf1Al0</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USnxe7hxP4I&amp;feature=related" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USnxe7hxP4I&amp;feature=related</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GO-9LQDFE2Y" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GO-9LQDFE2Y</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Truthseeker</title>
		<link>http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/debate-distracts-while-road-bomb-awaits.htm/comment-page-1#comment-6136</link>
		<dc:creator>Truthseeker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Oct 2008 03:10:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/debate-distracts-while-road-bomb-awaits.htm#comment-6136</guid>
		<description>Well Steve, perhaps you are in possession of evidence that some known or unknown branch of the US government gave them inside help, but it appears that the New York Times does not have it.  Would you care to forward it to us or them?   Not sure that the government&#039;s &quot;conspiracy theory&quot; and the 9/11 nutjob &quot;conspiracy theory&quot; are on the same plane as far as the definition of &quot;conspiracy theory&quot; goes.  Buncha Al Quaeda loonies hitting at the Great Satan&#039;s new brand symbol (G&#039;bye Statue of Liberty) on the grounds it offended their idea of maintaining the innocence of Islam from Western values is hardly the same kind of thing as officials of the US federal government assisting the assault and if so how exactly?  How did they assist them?   They knew about them but they let them go ahead?  OK so did they know it would demolish the WTC Twin Towers so dramatically and totally? If not, was it really such a great idea as it turned out to be?  Not beforehand, clearly.  It was small scale in prospect, even compared with boarding and downing many more planes at a time.  Any Federal Government involvement would have escalated it to a decent level commensurate with the ambitions of the dastardly planners of world domination or whatever.

They weren&#039;t wearing dish cloths anyhow, they were in jacket and trousers as we recall.  The government motives in suppressing evidence presumably had a lot to do with various understandable political motives from crowd control and avoiding blame for incompetence to trying to get the Bush friends the Bin Ladens out of town before they got lynched, etc, just as the EPA assessment of the smoke as non toxic was to avoid panic and get business back ASAP.   The list of such motives is easy to imagine.  The possibility of a conspiracy within the US government executive branch of aiding and abetting a very low tech amateurish attack on the symbols of American global commercial power and keeping it concealed afterwards from the bloodhound media of the world all eager to expose any such thing is by comparison totally inconceivable on any rational basis, that is all we claim.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well Steve, perhaps you are in possession of evidence that some known or unknown branch of the US government gave them inside help, but it appears that the New York Times does not have it.  Would you care to forward it to us or them?   Not sure that the government&#8217;s &#8220;conspiracy theory&#8221; and the 9/11 nutjob &#8220;conspiracy theory&#8221; are on the same plane as far as the definition of &#8220;conspiracy theory&#8221; goes.  Buncha Al Quaeda loonies hitting at the Great Satan&#8217;s new brand symbol (G&#8217;bye Statue of Liberty) on the grounds it offended their idea of maintaining the innocence of Islam from Western values is hardly the same kind of thing as officials of the US federal government assisting the assault and if so how exactly?  How did they assist them?   They knew about them but they let them go ahead?  OK so did they know it would demolish the WTC Twin Towers so dramatically and totally? If not, was it really such a great idea as it turned out to be?  Not beforehand, clearly.  It was small scale in prospect, even compared with boarding and downing many more planes at a time.  Any Federal Government involvement would have escalated it to a decent level commensurate with the ambitions of the dastardly planners of world domination or whatever.</p>
<p>They weren&#8217;t wearing dish cloths anyhow, they were in jacket and trousers as we recall.  The government motives in suppressing evidence presumably had a lot to do with various understandable political motives from crowd control and avoiding blame for incompetence to trying to get the Bush friends the Bin Ladens out of town before they got lynched, etc, just as the EPA assessment of the smoke as non toxic was to avoid panic and get business back ASAP.   The list of such motives is easy to imagine.  The possibility of a conspiracy within the US government executive branch of aiding and abetting a very low tech amateurish attack on the symbols of American global commercial power and keeping it concealed afterwards from the bloodhound media of the world all eager to expose any such thing is by comparison totally inconceivable on any rational basis, that is all we claim.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
