And by closet, I mean 'coming out'.
Via The Fanonite's weblog today I come across Rober Fisk's Independent piece for August 25th, 2007, entitled:
Even I question the 'truth' about 9/11
It turns out Robert Fisk, one of the most respected Western journalists covering issues of the Middle East, has his own questions regarding the events of 9/11/2001. He is one of the handful of journalists that are not 'embedded' with American and British military and diplomatic interests in the Middle East, and as such has been applauded numerous times for his journalistic courage in covering and reporting what most journalists wouldn't dare: realities on the ground.
So why the silence for so long on possibly the most important events that affected the Middle East in decades? It may have been the fear of being smeared by association with the 'loony' fringes of 911 alternative theorists. (I say 'alternative theorists', because the 'official account is itself also a conspiracy theory.) Fisk writes:
... I'm not talking about the crazed "research" of David Icke's Alice in Wonderland and the World Trade Center Disaster – which should send any sane man back to reading the telephone directory.
And he has a point. One of the 911 'Truth' Movement's weaknesses is that anyone can write unsubstantiated claims and make them public. However, that shouldn't put off real investigations into valid questions. In the end, the 'Truth Movement' should accept the same rigorous scrutiny and appraisal as it applies to the official theories and claims, all the better to reach the truth, its namesake goal.
But the same weakness of the 'Truth Movement' is also its main strength. Never before in history have so many people, from so many places on Earth, from all backgrounds and political persuasions, worked together in investigating and exposing the anomalies of a single event. The seeds of this 'movement' lie not in a charismatic leader, or one original thinker, but in the lies and contradictions of September 11th itself. Countless individuals came to similar conclusions on their own in the days, weeks and months following 911. Through the medium of the internet, they started sharing their findings, reinforcing their suspicions, and coming up with interpretations. It's become a fluid, global movement, truly democratic in that there are no leaders except those who prove themselves worthy of being heard, through their research and words. And though they agree that something is amiss about 911, beyond that you get opinions and explanations as diverse as the people themselves. This global struggle for truth, is composed of every individual who fights the fight among his family and community. These are the 'ravers' Fisk encountered, who eventually triggered him to voice the concerns he's been keeping to himself:
Each time I lecture abroad on the Middle East, there is always someone in the audience – just one – whom I call the "raver". Apologies here to all the men and women who come to my talks with bright and pertinent questions – often quite humbling ones for me as a journalist – and which show that they understand the Middle East tragedy a lot better than the journalists who report it. But the "raver" is real. He has turned up in corporeal form in Stockholm and in Oxford, in Sao Paulo and in Yerevan, in Cairo, in Los Angeles and, in female form, in Barcelona. No matter the country, there will always be a "raver".
Maybe as normal citizens who see the problems with 911, we expect that investigative journalists should know much more than we do, and question why they don't say anything, especially when they are of the calibre and courage of Robert Fisk. Fisk, at least, is humble enough to say:
His – or her – question goes like this. Why, if you believe you're a free journalist, don't you report what you really know about 9/11? Why don't you tell the truth – that the Bush administration (or the CIA or Mossad, you name it) blew up the twin towers? Why don't you reveal the secrets behind 9/11? The assumption in each case is that Fisk knows – that Fisk has an absolute concrete, copper-bottomed fact-filled desk containing final proof of what "all the world knows" (that usually is the phrase) – who destroyed the twin towers. Sometimes the "raver" is clearly distressed.
But with pressure from the public, Fisk finally comes out and says what most of us have been saying for years: That we don't have all the answers, but we sure have some questions:
But – here we go. I am increasingly troubled at the inconsistencies in the official narrative of 9/11. It's not just the obvious non sequiturs: where are the aircraft parts (engines, etc) from the attack on the Pentagon? Why have the officials involved in the United 93 flight (which crashed in Pennsylvania) been muzzled? Why did flight 93's debris spread over miles when it was supposed to have crashed in one piece in a field? Again, I'm not talking about the crazed "research" of David Icke's Alice in Wonderland and the World Trade Center Disaster – which should send any sane man back to reading the telephone directory.
I am talking about scientific issues. If it is true, for example, that kerosene burns at 820C under optimum conditions, how come the steel beams of the twin towers – whose melting point is supposed to be about 1,480C – would snap through at the same time? (They collapsed in 8.1 and 10 seconds.) What about the third tower – the so-called World Trade Centre Building 7 (or the Salmon Brothers Building) – which collapsed in 6.6 seconds in its own footprint at 5.20pm on 11 September? Why did it so neatly fall to the ground when no aircraft had hit it? The American National Institute of Standards and Technology was instructed to analyse the cause of the destruction of all three buildings. They have not yet reported on WTC 7. Two prominent American professors of mechanical engineering – very definitely not in the "raver" bracket – are now legally challenging the terms of reference of this final report on the grounds that it could be "fraudulent or deceptive".
Journalistically, there were many odd things about 9/11. Initial reports of reporters that they heard "explosions" in the towers – which could well have been the beams cracking – are easy to dismiss. Less so the report that the body of a female air crew member was found in a Manhattan street with her hands bound. OK, so let's claim that was just hearsay reporting at the time, just as the CIA's list of Arab suicide-hijackers, which included three men who were – and still are – very much alive and living in the Middle East, was an initial intelligence error.
But what about the weird letter allegedly written by Mohamed Atta, the Egyptian hijacker-murderer with the spooky face, whose "Islamic" advice to his gruesome comrades – released by the CIA – mystified every Muslim friend I know in the Middle East? Atta mentioned his family – which no Muslim, however ill-taught, would be likely to include in such a prayer. He reminds his comrades-in-murder to say the first Muslim prayer of the day and then goes on to quote from it. But no Muslim would need such a reminder – let alone expect the text of the "Fajr" prayer to be included in Atta's letter.
Let me repeat. I am not a conspiracy theorist. Spare me the ravers. Spare me the plots. But like everyone else, I would like to know the full story of 9/11, not least because it was the trigger for the whole lunatic, meretricious "war on terror" which has led us to disaster in Iraq and Afghanistan and in much of the Middle East. Bush's happily departed adviser Karl Rove once said that "we're an empire now – we create our own reality". True? At least tell us. It would stop people kicking over chairs.
Even I never heard of the reports of a "body of a female air crew member was found in a Manhattan street with her hands bound", and I've been researching 911 since 911! I applaud Robert Fisk's bravery in finally voicing his concerns, which are shared by literally millions (and growing) around the world. A man with his journalistic skills can only bring credibility to the 911 truth movement (while help weed out its own bad apples) if he chooses to. That these views are finally coming out in the mainstream, self-censoring, corporate and government controlled media, is a sign that some among them are coming to realize the futility of keeping the masses in the dark, as they are embarrassed continuously by ordinary readers and bloggers.
The major media's complicity in lying with their governments in provoking the war on Iraq was analysed and exposed from day 1. Their lies were ridiculed by astute bloggers and amateurs, until on every single lie they were forced to feint incompetence in explaining away the lies that citizens with computers were able to see through.
It may not be far off before the same happens in regards to 911. Til then, we must continue exposing their lies and endure their 'hit piece' propaganda, and show them that complicity in covering up crimes or inciting unjust wars will not pay.
Boycott corporate media, tell them why. Ask questions, stick to the highest standards. Keep on reading, keep on questioning. The future belongs to the people, and we are the people.
----------------------------------
(Why don't we go to the Independent site linked above, and mail them or Fisk directly to congratulate them for their courage in covering a glimpse of the issue? Let's encourage them to go further!)
... I encourage others to send in positive letters of encouragement. If not for the sake of expressed appreciation, then at least to offset the many letters of attack that they'll receive from the defenders of the government account! (And trust me, MANY times stories have gone unpublished or pulled, because of letter writing campaigns and threats of ending advertising contracts, we should try to counteract the active promotors of censorship).
Anyways, to:
newseditor@independent.co.uk
My email:
MZ, gotta say that Fisk's dismissal of "the ravers" and his "spare me the plots" but "like everyone else, I would like to know the full story of 9/11" cha-cha is disgraceful and transparently dishonest IMHO.
How can such a savvy journalist (or thinking adult) claim not to know the real story and yet be so certain that "the plots" and ravings and anger are beneath consideration. Old Fisk is gonna give us a glacial drift in the direction of "incompetence" at the doorstep of the air force, air controllers, CIA/FBI or Bush Admin PLUS how could the media have been so slovenly - let's not let that happen again.
I put him in the same department at Shit Factory as the Garden Gnome, Alex Cockburn, Palast, Al Franken, etc. - the popular "hard hitters" who steer everyone away from the Zionists.
Mark Crispin Miller and Gore Vidal are the only two I can think of who have been willing to publicly say that 911 stinks, and, in actual fact, they ain't said jack.
I heard that in Pakistan over 90% of the population does not think that Osama bin Laden and Al Qadea were behind the 9/11 attacks, I'm sorry I do not remember where I heard this, but in other middle eastern countries as well as in many countries worldwide, belief in the 9/11 myth is shrinking. It would seem to me, to be an important fact to point out to those who believe all the hype about "terrorism" and "islamofacism", the fact that people don't agree with bin Laden, people know that the whole thing's a farce. Of course it does not surprise me that the media does not cover this fact, but I think it is am important one to point out to people, that although in the U.S. the myth of terrorism is questioned less than belief in god, in ohter countries the truth is coming out, and is discussed openly. Still, Fisk should be encouraged to keep asking questions, and should be sent additional information like passports that survive fires, mohammed atta with jack abramoff, ISI wire transfers and so on, but maybe his admission will clear the way for more to do the same.
... I appreciate your concerns, and agree that Fisk doesn't go far enough. I never claimed that.
I congratulated the Independent for being a major newspaper (possibly the first in the Western world) that had an article devoted to raising questions about 911. The first mainstream newspaper. And that in itself took courage, as others wouldn't dare. Sure, Fisk first does the whole disclaimer thing, disassociates himself from the loony ones (he only mentions Icke by name, and I happen to agree with him there), and goes on to anticipate attacks of being called crazy, so preempts it all with waffle. But I find that natural in his position as a leading reporter on the Middle East.
Sure, it may be a ploy to suck people towards the officially sanctioned 'incompetence' theory, (and that's what he usually did when dismissing questions by pointing to Bush's failures) but the questions he raises are new to him. Reports of a DEAD crew lady? Forged Atta's will? Living hijackers? Unexplained collapses, covered by fraudulence? These hit harder than incompetence.
I applauded him for being a brave ME journalist (one of a handful that frankly talk about Israeli war crimes as war crimes, as well as American crimes), and now the first to air heavy questions on 911.
While Chomsky and Palast actively cover for Israeli crimes and shift blame, Fisk generally writes what he sees, and its usually reporting from the ground. (I dunno enough about Cockburn and Franken)
Just because I congratulate him for something doesn't mean I agree or congratulate him for ALL his views. He still talks through the 'Islamist resistance' paradigm, among others. At least now he's come out on one possibility, that may give others the confidence to also come out (and trust me, Fisk has a LOT of respect among those who claim to be ME experts), and this may be a first step for him as well.
I'm just saying, there's not as clear evidence of him being an obfuscator like Chomsky and Palast. If we attack him, that may put him off. If he sees support in numbers, he may go further.
It took years of 'ravers' to get him to publicly question 911 (a BIG step for a mainstream guy. remember Monbiot started off as a questioner only to become a government propagandist). Maybe we should rave a little extra, you never know what good might come out of it.
(and if your fears are true, he'll expose himself, so no harm either way)
ps. yes I am Majid Zakaria. And what of it? Please don't use this blog as evidence of me being something sinister.
It is not so much "that Fisk doesn't go far enough.", it is the very fact that he writes comments like this with regard to the Bali bombings:
"The French have already paid a price for their initial support for Mr Bush. The killing of 11 French submarine technicians in Karachi has been followed by the suicide attack on the French oil tanker Limburg off the coast of Yemen. Now, it seems, it is the turn of Australia....'
Source
Mr Fisk is another pseudo-"alternative" source of the same big lie and it suprises me Monkey Zerg that you, being an Australian Palestinian would even entertain him, let alone post this as a blog.
"ps. yes I am Majid Zakaria. And what of it? Please don't use this blog as evidence of me being something sinister.", wrote MZ.
Nobody here is using this blog as "evidence" of you being "something sinister", but don't be alarmed when people merely point out a few contradictions of a Palestinian applauding and calling for the support of Fisk who, no doubt, will soon become the mainstream mouthpiece of the "911 movement" with a view of totally misrepresenting the real story thus taring us all with the same "alternative" brush that paints a more detailed picture on the official canvas.
with Fisk's detractors.
It took him almost six years to figure out what should have taken him only 6 months - MAXIMUM.
The official version of what happened on 9/11 is simply not possible.
That's far from comendable.
Fisk is either retarded or he knows that the whole thing is about to blow and he's trying to minimize his culpability.
And I sincerely doubt that he's retarded.
I appreciate, however, your optimism about his sincerity.
I wish it were true. It would be nice to have more people with his knowledge, experience and notoriety on our side.
---------------------------------------
"Money" has no value - people do.
... I said:
"That these views are finally coming out in the mainstream, self-censoring, corporate and government controlled media, is a sign that some among them are coming to realize the futility of keeping the masses in the dark, as they are embarrassed continuously by ordinary readers and bloggers."
Noone can speak for Fisk's motives, but even though I think the best tactic would be to positively encourage more (every little helps), just like how 'raver's eventually forced Fisk to air his views.
He may still blame Arabs, but that doesn't negate that he took a good step, even if its to save his credibility. What it shows is that we (big collective 'we') are FORCING the issue into the mainstream.
Look at it this way: I personally work with many activists in uni in causes such as social justice, anti-war, Palestine solidarity, etc. Yet MOST of them wouldn't even listen to me about 911, because their gatekeeping gods told them not to (they even quote Chomsky). I read Fisk, Pappe, and Cooke among others NOT because they are 911 truthers, but because they are good sources of info on other topics, even if I disagree with them on somethings.
Now that Fisk asked these questions, all the 911-blind justice seekers who would never listen to us mere mortals about 911, might start considering alternatives, or listening to us more, because a (to them) trusted mainstream non-loony guy seems to have those same questions. THAT's the angle I take it from.
Don't forget that even though we here on WUFYS may be very similar in our deductions, and may have no need for Fisk as a source, out in the communities, every little helps, in a step by step way.
I doubt anyone here came about their fully formed conclusions from day 1. First a question was asked. The seeds had to be planted. I only 'applaud' Fisk and the Independent on a tactical point of view, I'm not stupid thinking that they only JUST discovered these questions. Fisk himself says that he's had these questions for ages and has been self censoring. We (ravers) forced him to air them. We should also not put him off but encourage him to go further. Not for our sake, but for those who blindly believe the official account purely on a source basis.
Am I making any sense here? I hope you see it as tactical (altruistic, maybe) as opposed to putting hope in Fisk.
PlanetQuo:
"What is to be gained from supporting people whose beliefs in respect of who did 9-11 are diametric to those of the anti-Zionist movement?"
You never know, admitting living hijackers and other things, Fisk may change his view over who did 911. I support many people who believe Arabs did 911, but on non-911 issues. I try to inform them, but I don't cut relations. How else will we spread the word?
"From an anti-Zionist perspective, Fisk is a liability rather than an asset."
But from a 911-truth, he could be the initiator for many who wouldn't have ever considered 911 alternatives to llok into them, leading more to look deep enough to realize the Zionist angle.
"As I have already pointed-out, Fisk isn't telling us anything that we don't already know."
That was never my point.
"I'm surprised that being a Palestinian and a Muslim, you are congratulating someone who believes Islamists/Arabs to be the perpetrators of 9-11. If I felt the urge to contact Fisk, it would be to correct him in his mistaken belief that Islamists/Arabs carried-out the 9-11 attacks, and not to congratulate him. That was my point Majid."
Oi, many Palestinians, even family members of mine, believe the Zionist propaganda. They accuse me of being in 'denial' over problems in our societies, or say its understandable resistance, and so on. Yes, now that he's taken the first step, do contact him and give him pointers.
"You are correct to praise Fisk for the excellent job he has done with his coverage of Israel's war crimes, but incorrect to state that he is the "first to air heavy questions on 911.""
He is the first MAINSTREAM guy to do so, that I know of, and that is a big step in light of all the hit pieces this year.
"Although you have been researching 9-11 since you were fifteen, you appear to have overlooked both these articles published by British newspapers."
I only moved to the UK several years ago, and wasn't aware of these articles. Thanks for pointing them out.
Michael said:
"...Fisk who, no doubt, will soon become the mainstream mouthpiece of the "911 movement" with a view of totally misrepresenting the real story thus taring us all with the same "alternative" brush that paints a more detailed picture on the official canvas."
Though it's still too early to say, I fear you may be right. But ignoring him won't stop him becoming the mainstream mouthpiece. I may be slightly more optimistic, but your concerns are valid. (Just look at the rest of the 911 'truth' movement that steers away from Zionists). We shall see.
qrswave:
"Fisk is either retarded or he knows that the whole thing is about to blow and he's trying to minimize his culpability.
And I sincerely doubt that he's retarded."
I think I made it clear in my blog when I said it may be some among major media are forced by us 'ravers' to speak to avoid embarrassment, as happened in Iraq. But we shouldn't invitingly open the door for people to enter, only to reprimand them for coming in late. We should encourage people to come in no matter how late, and once in to go further, not attack them and send them out again. I hope the analogy makes sense.
And please stick to MonkeyZerg, that's my chosen screenname. (MZ is fine)
Cheers all, I hope my approach makes a little more sense.
I have never had the misfortune to be present at a Robert Fisk lecture. I suppose it is inconceivable to me to spend my time and energy listening to someone whose principal objective is to create a liberal cover story for world events. Fisk paints a world picture which is consistent within the pre-established parameters of geopolitical debate. However, Fisk's current commentary is indicative that the official 911 fiction is crumbling from pressures that ordinary citizens are applying by asking poignant questions. It is in the spirit that I ask "Mr.Fisk what took you so long?
Additionally, Whatever bunch of conspirators perpetrated 911, they made miscalculations. Zionist were certainly involved but they were alone. It appears from various historical reviews that false flag operations are very common; however, in the past information has been slow moving affording the perpetrators time for the general public to lose interest. As a result, the criminals got away. I look at it like a bank robbery. The robbers always got away because of brilliant planing and execution. This time the police response time was unexpectedly shorten. As a result, the crooks are throwing everything at the public to buy time. Hence, it is time for a major false flag operation. Meanwhile, the Fisk's of the world put out meaningless dribble. Consider this thought- If Fisk is an investigated reporter and he has questions about the official fiction regarding 911 then why does Fisk have no answers? I suppose we will have to wait 6 long years before he has any answers. Don't hold your breath. America will be under marshal law long before then.
I have always suggested that Judaism and Zionism are not monolithic. The recent developments in Watertown, MA have shed a great deal of light on the different factions among the elites. Publicly Turkey and Israel have tussled over the recent handling of the Armenian Genocide by the ADL. Why would the Turkish government be so concerned about exposing a Jewish crime? Could it be that those very Zionist still weld a great deal of power in Turkey. The Dönmeh Turks have remained hidden and prefer to remain that way. However, what is the connection between the Armenian genocide and Bolshevik revolution? What is the connection between trotskyites and the Neocons? Where do the Chabad Lubavitchers fit into all this? Remember Rabbi Dov Zakheim and the Missing Trillions. Lets not forget White House Lubavitch spoken person Arie Fleischer and the role he played during the 911. He fielded all the questions early in the 911 saga. Consider newly elected French president Sarkozy and his Jewish roots. THESE ARE REAL QUESTIONS BUT I SUPPOSE THAT THE WORLD IS BEST SERVED BY INVESTIGATING DAVID IKES REPTILE CONNECTION! IF FISK IS AWARE OF IKE THEN HE IS AWARE OF THE MORE SERIOUS CLAIMS THAT 911 TRUTH MOVEMENT HAS MADE. Thank you Mr. Fisk by misdirecting people again. I am sure that was an accident.
It's disappointing when Fisk writes about al-Qa'ida as if it really were an "Islamic terrorist organization" as opposed to Mossad terrorists and legitimate resistance fighters, mentions David Icke, suggests that any Manhattan plot was "imaginary", and says, "Spare me the ravers. Spare me the plots."
But he does sensibly point out that he is The Independent's correspondent on the Middle East rather than conspiracies, and mentions problems with the official story ranging from the lack of clear evidence as to what hit the Pentagon, evidence that Flight 93 was shot down - sidestepping disinfo traps for the unwary such as "UA93 landed at Cleveland" - and, most importantly, mentions the scientific problems with the "fires collapsed three high-rises" theory.
Fisk is technically correct about the Bush Admin being too incompetent to pull off an operation on the scale of 9/11, but that is clearly a straw man. Any researcher who takes time out to research 9/11 properly will find that the official story is impossible, since it contravenes the invariant laws of mathematics, physics, chemistry, biology, logic, and psychology. And there is only one group that could have possibly got away with the crime for six years: the Zionist Mafia.
Office compartment fires do not bring down steel-framed high-rises in the manner of a controlled demolition, and they do not yield partly evaporated steel members or pools of molten steel or iron that are observed in the debris pile. A bizarre series of improbable 'coincidences' is more likely to fit within the framework of a series of events that incorporates the so-called "random" events as a salient part of the causal chain. It is ridiculous to imagine that human DNA can survive an inferno whilst aircraft aluminum is vaporised without trace, and "Arabic hijackers" have non-Arabic DNA. Human action is purposeful behavior, as Mises points out, so the perpetrators of a crime will tend to be those who benefit from it. And "suicide pilots" cannot be both dead and alive.
The Russians, the Pakistanis, the Saudis, etc, could not have got away with it. There is only one group that fits the bill:
But what would any of us do if we were in Robert Fisk's position? He is still doing some good by covering topics such as Blair's lies and deceptions regarding torture and rape perpetrated by the Algerian security forces, Israel's killing of well over 1,000 people in its 2006 war on Lebanon, the fact that the identity of the killers of Iraqi civilians is not necessarily as claimed by the US military, the fact that promoting sectarian conflict and civil war is actually part of a US divide and rule strategy, debunking the claim that Hizbollah are "terrorists", the folly of Bush's claim that the "war on terror" can be won by unending sacrifices of troops and civilians, promoting Jimmy Carter's book Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid and mentioning attacks on him by the likes of Abe Foxman, Bush's state of denial after more than half a million deaths in the largest military debacle since Vietnam, and showing how the press lied about Egypt's "aggression" against Israel in 1967 when the Six-Day War began with Israel attacking Egypt, etc.
If I were in Fisk's position, I would probably stay with the newspaper and expose as much as I could get away with whilst retaining the job, but also set up a website and post comments to forums under a pseudonym. (I hasten to add that I do not have a famous secret alter ego, much as the tinfoil brigade would like to speculate!) And that supposes that someone whose time was taken up with working as a Middle East correspondent would have sufficient spare time to research areas such as 9/11. Moreover, there is probably more promotion of disinfo nonsense such as "no planes" or "almost everyone is an agent" nowadays, than when I began looking into 9/11 in early 2003. An investigator might be forgiven for initially getting the impression that the 9/11 "conspiracy theorists" are mostly cranks and crackpots.
So yes, it is disheartening to see Fisk promote some aspects of the official story that we know to be barefaced lies. But, for someone who is just waking up from their slumber, Fisk will start to guide them in the right direction without counterproductive, damaging, divisive claims such as "99% of truth seekers are part of the Zionist criminal network", "Ernst Zundel and Germar Rudolf are Zionist agents", "a reporter who has fled to Estonia to escape US justice is really dead or imprisoned", etc. That lunatic, "ravers" fringe within the truth movement does more harm than good, which is why Fisk would be a better source for beginners.
If Fisk should have taken only six months to figure out that the official accounts of false-flag terror are wrong, then someone who is just waking up and refers to Fisk and then sources such as WRH should also figure it out in six months or so. But if they're fed disinfo absurdities such as 99% of truth seekers are bad, or half the people on the internet are really just a few dozen shills with a lot of pseudonyms and time on their hands, or the "million Zionist agents" 'theory', they may quit investigating before they realise the truth, which is the purpose of such disinfo.
PlanetKwerr busts his own edict, in which he said he would take the personal spam off WUFYS and restrict it to his own website.
I'm not going to bother feeding the trolls, except to show what Kerr said about MonkeyZerg in emails to me:
This MonkeyZerg character bears all the hallmarks of another of Nina's pseudonyms. There seems no end to the number of fake profiles this shill is operating.
[...]
MonkeyZerg writes amazingly well for a Palestinian methinks!!!
Source (It's a long file; use Find on this page "monkeyzerg" to find it.)
So according to Kwerr, apossumprincess = Nina = Gina = Eireann Goddess = MonkeyZerg = nearly half the people on the internet. That's what comes of allowing just about anyone to practice internet private investigations without a license and without a clue!
My advice to the rather more extreme fringe of conspiracy theorists would be to spend some time away from the computer, get a job, interact with people in the real world, get out into the fresh air and take some exercise, and wake up and smell the coffee. It could make all the difference, and avoid the necessity of having to call for the psychiatrist.
Capt'n Peter Sault-Spam affects a calm, composed air as he heads for Davey Jones' Locker.
Capt'n Spam, with visible beads of sweat fore and aft, reverts to his tried and very false misdirection technique:
PlanetKwerr busts his own edict, in which he said he would take the personal spam off WUFYS and restrict it to his own website.
I'm not going to bother feeding the trolls, except to show what Kerr said about MonkeyZerg in emails to me:
The thing is Capt'n Spam, PQ's info on you is on the money. I for one don't give a shit if he's straight, gay, bi, or uninterested. But your desperately out of character grasping at COZ's gratuitous smear-handle indicates he's landed a shot in your cobblers.
That and the vacuouness of this little effort paints a real clear picture of the Good Ship Chum heading for the bottom. Or are Daryl Smith's "international long-distance mind-control technique to blame"? Expect we'll see you coughing up some more spam as you take on more saultwater.
... that makes or breaks Mz's position as legitimate and commendable or just naive and harmful. And that is : is the person in question [1]- a platonic grudging player or [2]- a willing participant in the grand deception. My senses are that a huge number of people are the [1] for a variety of reasons, like support of their family. Of course at any time, even at the 11th hour, they can decide to make a move and should be welcomed without being "reprimanded". Unfortunately I, too, have more reasons to believe that Fisk is the [2]. He proactively stands on the wrong side on major issues (holocaust, 911, Hariri, ...) and right on smaller issues (Israeli atrocities in local attacks, skirmishes, policies,...). He is basically standing between Israel and us. He makes a deal with Israel on one hand and a deal with us on the other hand. Israel seems satisfied with their deal of keeping quiet while he slanders them on small issues. And he wants us to keep quiet when he lies to the world on fundamental issues at our expense. Bad deal.
Now the question is what if he wants to change course. I say great, but NOT at our expenses anymore. He has used up his ration of 'benefit of doubt'. I see no reasons to believe that he will not stab us again.
this post devolved into a string of accusations and slurs.
why can't you people just read things at face value and be civil with each other?
MZ made a fair point - I don't agree with it entirely, but reasonable people can differ.
PQ why wouldn't you refer to him by whatever name he asks to be called? What if I changed my handle and asked you to call me only by my new handle? Would you object?
And as far as the email that Poseidon shared, I think it's not a good idea to share in public what others tell you in private, but I also disagree with what was said about MZ, who I know to be genuine and extremely intelligent.
---------------------------------------
"Money" has no value - people do.
Whitewater scandal, and derailing the investigation of Bill and Hilary Clinton, who were eventually exhonorated. I think he was also involved in the Mena Arkansas drug running investigation. FISK IS DIRTY!
---------------------------------------
Pray the Rosary Daily
----------The Fiske Report.
Robert Fiske was the first Independent Council appointed to investigate the Whitewater scandal. For a variety of reasons, including his past association with BCCI (a failed bank involved with the laundering of drug money), Fiske was considered by many unsuitable to investigate the various failed S&L in the Whitewater affair (many of which also appear to have been involved with the laundering of drug money) and Fiske was eventually replaced by Kenneth Starr.
The Preliminary Report On Vincent Foster by Robert Fiske.
Note that Fiske's report was only preliminary. His final report on Vincent Foster remains sealed. When the Wall Street Journal filed a Freedom Of Information Act request to force the release of Fiske's final report, the court, in an unprecedented prior restraint, ordered the Wall Street Journal not to report on the case, or to even mention what the final ruling actually was.
-----------------------------
Pray the Rosary Daily
Check your facts. Robert Fiske and Robert Fisk are two very different people. Fiske is an attorney and Fisk in War correspondent. Or am I missing something?
Whow what a crab fest of confusion. But the chum tasted pretty good, sorry I have a different guy, I guess.
---------------------------------------
Pray the Rosary Daily
http://carmenisacat.blogspot.com/
"If I were in Fisk's position, I would probably stay with the newspaper and expose as much as I could get away with whilst retaining the job, but also set up a website and post comments to forums under a pseudonym."
If a Allah fearing anti zionist comes to a site such as this and gets mistaken for a Zionist troll..then I think this advice is not only unwise but unfruitful.
The only people one can actually trust are people who are willing to give you their names. In writing.
http://carmenisacat.blogspot.com/
How ridiculous. More paranoia from the capital of paranoia.
I had the wonderful opportunity to hear Mr. Fisk speak at the German Evangelical mission in Verdun, Beirut. Great speaker...funny as hell.
He showed how the media alters HIS articles and media clips by presenting an original piece filmed in Palestine in which there were bull dozers, chickens and Palestinian landowners. The chicken sounds were edited out in order to jam up the volume on the bull dozers. He explained that his work is often syndicated and he doesn't always have "editorial control" after a piece gets to the editing room. The goal of editing out the chickens was to show how there are no "signs of life" in Palestine and the settlements are constructed on dry old land sans humans or their animals.
He then showed us various editorial cartoons in which he had been threatened.
In one particular case, he was portrayed as a "rabid dog" between two other characters. He said, "What do you do with a rabid dog?"
You...put him down. Quote unquote.
In other words he was threatened.
Not only not dirty but downright courageous.
But who am I talking to here?
Nevermind. Truth will set you free but only when you get to it.
Begin CHUM TRAIL at above two posts
---------------------------------------
Pray the Rosary Daily
I would not normally post the content of private emails without permission. However, Jim Kerr (PlanetQuo) announced on his website some weeks ago that he would be publishing every piece of correspondence he had received from me (and he has now published). This came about after I told him that I did not agree with his views about certain posters at this forum being "Zionist shills". So I pre-empted him by publishing our exchanges.
Of course, Kerr's suggestion, that MonkeyZerg was somehow deceitful, was absurd. I also fail to see why, if a poster prefers to be addressed by their chosen handle on this forum, some other poster insists on calling him/her by another name.
With characters such as Kerr, the normal rules of netiquette do not apply.
This is a strange way of "keeping the personal stuff off WUFYS". But for PlanetClouseau's team, it's par for the course.
When I set up my website, I promised my family I would not reveal my personal details. I'm not going to publish merely on the say-so of some physically, intellectually and emotionally crippled forum stalker who has outstayed his welcome.
As for Kerr's website, it is worth visiting for a laugh now and again, but no one takes it seriously. There are a few copy and paste pages, which hardly requires much talent, and the front page is full of personal BS that is of zero public interest.
"When I set up my website, I promised my family I would not reveal my personal details. I'm not going to publish merely on the say-so of some physically, intellectually and emotionally crippled forum stalker who has outstayed his welcome."
Saved your family a bit of embarrassment for a time didn't it?
So, Jim is a 'cripple' for having one arm?
If I ever bump into you I shall ensure that you fully empathise with the cripple's situation you humourless piece of theory.
Hi everyone.
Wow, 2 days since I posted, and already all this. I never knew I garnered so much attention. Just a few comments on my part:
I hope that even though I have a different opinion of Fisk than most here, that that doesn't taint me as some pro-Fisk therefore pro-Zionist whatever. I agree with most of your arguments against Fisk, but not that we should drop him like Chomsky. My only reasoning behind this is not because Fisk has something to offer us, but because he has something to offer all the 911-blind people out there.
What I don't like is how very unforgiving we seem here. Poseidon showed many things that Fisk can be commended for, and PlanetQuo showed some that Fisk is wrong over, things that I disagree with Fisk. Can't we acknowledge both, and make the best of the situation? I'm a Bollyn supporter/promotor, I've linked to his works here and on myspace, but I can only reach so many using Bollyn. However, friends who dismiss Bollyn, and don't believe 911 alternative theories, are now thinking twice after seeing that Fisk hinself has questions. My whole point is that of tactics. I'm giving Fisk a chance until he proves himself to be a gatekeeper like Chomsky.
BTW, I've given talks to small groups about 911, and I always have to start with disclaimers disassociating myself from the likes of Icke, because that's what most people think of when you broach the question! So it's not surprising that Fisk does that.
PlanetQuo said:
"Fisk tells us nothing that we don't already know, and is actually working against the anti-Zionist movement by claiming that Islamists/Arabs were the perpetrators of the attacks. We don't need Robert Fisk - he is working against us. I find it incredible that as Palestinian Muslim, you are congratulating someone who has besmirched the good name of your Islamic brothers and sisters."
I felt I answered this in my previous posts. I agree that we don't 'need' Fisk. I agree he tells us anti-Zionists nothing we don't already know. However I disagree that he works against us. He's a reporter, he reports the official story of Arab hijackers, like nearly everyone else does, BUT he is the only mainstream reporter that simultaneously brought questions regarding these Arab hijackers and 911. So even if we don't need him, I personally find that I can 'use' him, not for your benefit, but for the skeptics I have to deal with in person that would otherwise not listen to my points. Let's agree to disagree then, why is it so incredible to you that I hold a different opinion?
Also, though I appreciate Poseidon's contribution regarding Fisk, bringing Bollyn and DBS into it was totally unnecessary.
Now onto me.
What annoys me is all the suspicions and baseless speculation that goes around, wasting people's time. If someone wants to know me, why
don't you just ask me?
Me and my 'peacemaking' self not only defended DBS because of what I consider insufficient proof that he's an agent, but I also reprimanded DBS for doing the same things to others. Same goes to all the talk surrounding Nina. Quite frankly, I'm tired of reading through tracts of info regarding internet personalities' possible motives, possible secret IDs, possible etc. Let's stick to sharing info, and supporting/refuting each other's arguments with facts/sources.
Here I'd like to thank Kats for putting up good posts essentially disagreeing with me, without making it personally about me. (Btw, I'll categorize Fisk in no.2 when I see more bad out of him, as I still see excuses for his major wrongs, eg he is not a holocaust scholar or historian and doesn't claim to be, he 'reports' 911, and now aired his questions!, I don't know enough about Hariri)
PlanetQuo, next time you're in Scotland, let me know, we may arrange to meet. Or just talk to me. Just to set the record straight, I am not Nina.
I am Palestinian. I am glad that you are amazed by my writing skills. I will take that as a compliment. Now, just how many other Palestinians do you know that write worse than me? I'm interested in where you got your idea about Palestinian literacy.
(Here's a hint, consider that many Palestinians grew up in English countries because of the diaspora, so can read/write English as well as any other. It's no big deal. Edward Said comes to mind.)
As to the whole MonkeyZerg/Majid Zak problem. Thanks QRSwave and Poseidon for supporting me on that one. PlanetQuo, you seem to call a lot of people using names I'm sure they didn't introduce themselves to you with (Pissodeion, for example). So why give me special treatment?
Just to let you know (and it's no secret) everywhere on the net I am known as MonkeyZerg EXCEPT myspace. Whether it be here, my email addresses, Anti-Neocons, Opposing Digits, even non-political pages like anime or fanfiction or whatever, I am MonkeyZerg. Google MonkeyZerg, and it'll all be me (except for a few weird east Asian sites, but then again you get a lot of Starcraft fans in Korea).
So why is myspace the only one I use Majid in? To be frank (and I've said this before) the only reason I joined myspace was because in early 2006, DBS encouraged listeners to make myspace profiles and link to TFC. I never heard of myspace before that, and thought that a silly name may be inappropriate for it. Thus Majid Zak. I thought people are supposed use names, I didn't expect to find so many myspacers using all sorts of handles. It was purely out of ignorance at the time.
So when I started posting on WUFYS, I reverted to MonkeyZerg. You'll find that my signature on other forums (eg anti-neocons) openly state that MonkeyZerg is Majid Zak on myspace. This ain't no secret, I'm not hiding my 'Majid Zak' ID. I just PREFER to be known as MonkeyZerg, as it is my UNIQUE internet handle since I BEGAN using the internet. So PLEASE use MonkeyZerg, because that's MY prefered name, and I hope you respect that.
BTW, is 'Orangutan' or 'Monkey Meths of Mount Lawley' referring to me? Or to Crimes of Zion? They both sound chimby to me. Or are you saying we are one and the same. A little clarification please. (I wonder who introduced himself as 'Orangutan' to you...)
Also, Poseidon, if you have any questions regarding me, please ask me directly. I don't like being talked about behind my back. I assume you are 'Steve'. Let me confirm that I am not Fester. So what if I use 'peace'. I also used to always say 'keep up the good struggle'. I attacked Masher for thinking we're all DBS. I think I've argued with you respectfully, I never knew you may have held similar views.
Another disclaimer: yes I am Nina's friend. I only got to know CoZ after I saw him defending Nina. That's when I added him on myspace and commented on his myspace page regarding Nina. I was Nina's friend for nearly a year, and though I stopped using myspace, I went back to ask her about the allegations against her at the time, and added CoZ as well. That's that.
(also, my myspace link is:
http://www.myspace.com/monkeyzerg
It's not like I'm hiding the connection between 'MonkeyZerg' and Majid Zak.)
Back in the early Nineties, I was on some internet mailing lists where they used *plonk* to represent a particular user hitting a killfile, rather like fecal matter dropping into a toilet. And the term was commonly used on Usenet.
My initial post in this thread was germane to the topic on hand, and then TeamQuo jumped in with off-topic personal BS and absurd speculations about person A = person B in the absence of any credible evidence. The funny thing is that PlanetQuo even had the effrontery to say:
"The discussion here was all about Robert Fisk and 9-11 until you turned it into a crapfest."
Source
The same thing happened when I answered nobodaddy's call for someone to embed a video on another thread. (It was subsequently added to the top of the blog.) Within hours, the hecklers from the lunatic fringe of the movement had started to post off-topic personal attacks and insults.
In another thread, the usual suspects worked themselves up into such a lather that no less than four people - two of them women - were told to "go f*** yourself". And that was all within a single sentence of PlanetQuo's emotionally incontinent response!
This has happened time and again over the last few months. First PlanetQuo (Jim Kerr) attacked Crimes of Zion (Jamie Linton) when they had a disagreement, and spent the next few months attacking him here and on his website. Then Suzette (whippette) had the initiative to contact CoZ and apossumprincess (Nina), both of whom, in Kerr's twisted little fantasy world, were "Zionist agents". So Kerr attacked Suzette for "acting unilaterally", because he perceived her actions as a threat to his perverted world-view.
I had been corresponding with Kerr for a few weeks. He and Michael had been promising to come up with reams of evidence, the result of their "meticulous research", that would prove certain people were Zionist shills. When their promises came to naught, and I saw how Kerr had treated Suzette, I decided to tell Kerr I had concluded that his ideas were far-fetched and highly unlikely. This was the trigger for his attacks on me, such as the ridiculous claim that I am "Peter Sault".
I had noticed that around last Easter (early April), Kerr had written of the death of a family member, in his correspondence with Linton that Kerr had chosen to publish. When it got to the point where Kerr was attacking me and calling me a "Zionist shill", I decided I would try to be nice and try to help. At this point, I thought that TeamQuo were timewasters and bullshitters. I said I did not think that Kerr was a Zionist shill, or even a bad person, but he did have psychological issues, which could have been exacerbated by a tragic event such as the loss of a family member.
Of course, Kerr then went berserk, playing the death card as a means of attacking me by claiming I had deliberately used it to attack him. But TeamQuo proved my point when they confirmed that it had been Jim's father, and Jim reacted badly. This appears to have been the event that tipped Jim into the narcissistic abyss.
Kerr seems to be one of those types that, when you try to help them, they just turn it against you and claim it was an "attack". Over the previous year, his relatively cosy world-view would have been shattered as he learned about the evils of Zionism and the associated warmongering and terrorism. Then, around December to March, he got into an argument with Brendon O'Connell on an internet forum. Then his father died, after wasting away from cancer. So O'Connell, along with anyone who failed to lavish Kerr with sufficient praise and adulation, and half the people on the internet, were suddenly transformed into "Zionist agents" who were out to get him. He then concluded that the friends were never real friends after all, merely "bits of HTML code".
And consider how Kerr writes about how he is utterly ruthless in dealing with enemies, he gives no quarter, takes no prisoners, and makes no gender allowances:
I am utterly ruthless in dealing with enemies. I give no quarter, and take no prisoners. I make no gender allowances. An enemy is an enemy regardless of whether or not they have tits.
Source
Yet Kerr starts crying like a baby as soon as someone suggests that bereavement just might have caused him some personal issues.
TeamQuo have shown that they are only interested in noise, heat and distractions, which is contrary to the purposes of this forum. Although I will still be aware of their posts, I am going to ignore them until such time as they can demonstrate their willingness to get back to fighting Zionism as opposed to each other.
To TeamQuo:
The final solution to your own *plonk*, Dr. Petersault,
will make Hitlers' "Final Solution" look like child's play.
MonkeyZerg, I don't believe you're Nina or Fester or DBS or half the people on the internet, or deceptive in any way. PlanetQuo suggested to me that you were aligned with the "shills" because of your friends list, suggested that you were Nina because the two of you sign your comments with 'cheers', and stated that you bore "all the hallmarks of another of Nina's pseudonyms". Of course, Nina isn't a shill, and I doubt if any of your friends are either.
PlanetQuo and Michael kept giving me the impression that they had reams of "meticulously-researched" evidence. At one point, I considered that there was some possibility of their claims being correct. When no more evidence was forthcoming, it soon became apparent that TeamQuo were nothing more than nuts, timewasters and bullshitters. They have made so many blunders along the lines of person A is supposed to be person B and person C is supposed to be person D, that their opinions are entirely inconsequential.
False. The Nina email was sent to PlanetQueer on Wednesday, April 25, as evidenced by the date on the email.
You broke the agreement by forwarding it to Suzette sometime before May 5, 2007, which is when she posted it on the NOLAJBS forum. Breaking a promise and then whinging about being "attacked" when you're called on it is pussy shit.
The Fisk piece appeared at informationclearhouse.info. I was interested in the article mainly for the comments that it generated. The comments were very anti-Fisk. The commentS ranged from he was a shill to useful idiot. Of course there were some people defending him. Anyway, I want to see how far the debate had progressed and I could not find the article on the websites front page. I searched the website and found the article. Link enclosed http://www.google.com/custom?hl=en&client=pub-5174720432180771&cof=FORID...
HOWEVER THE ARTICLE LINK WAS REPLACED WITH THIS LINK:http://wordsea.com/fisk%20911.cfm?pt=2&rpt=1&kt=1
Basically Information clearing house had decided not to carry the article. I found that strange since it had generated over 200 comments. I also recently started researching Khazarian Royal bloodlines on Google and found that the search engine had return many hits that were dead and lead to this link http://q-find.com/%20Khazars%20kingdom.cfm?pt=2&rpt=1&kt=1
and the SAME TYPE OF WEBSITE THAT HAD REPLACED FISK'S ARTICLE ON INFORMATIONCLEARING HOUSE WEBSITE SEARCH GOOGLE. A search on Google for "Peter Kawaja wife deaths" yielded mixed results but still I found links to the ubiquitous website http://101links.info/rns/b-search/c-Peter%20Kawaja%20wife%20deaths/
I also want to mention that this link does not appear all the time but seems "random". Does anyone have similar experiences?
Kerr, you really need to find something meaningful in your life to mitigate the emotional stress that this internet shit obviously causes you, man. You've been looking like you're about to bust a ventricle.
What you don't seem to realise, Kerr, is that he who gets upset loses, in this game. Happiness is surely the best revenge. If I worked myself into a fluster that bad I'd take some time off. If you're not laughing more than you're fuming, it's time for a break. Laugh at yourself - we sure as fuck do!
You always say shit like this, you've been saying it to me for months. For you to even imagine that you're capable of "destroying" people by writing about them is proof enough that you need to get out more, and I'm not even joking. Actually, a desire to "destroy" people is something you have in common with Brendon O'Connell - "Destroying you will be fun :)", he said to me in an email, before he started spamming WUFYS with all that meth shit.
Poseidon is not Peter Wakefield Sault. That's just another sleuthing blunder to add to the long, hilarious list, I'm afraid. It's a pity that you "staked your credibility" on Poseidon being Debus, because now there's none to stake on him being Peter Sault.
How can he explain them except to say that they're coincidences? You already explained that yourself. Poseidon would be a fool to reveal his name when he's covered so well with all this Peter Sault shit. As long as people are barking up the wrong tree, he's got nothing to worry about.
A revised list of howlers is below.
PlanetQueer:
Other photos of Gina make it even clearer that it's not the case.
(Having said that, I'm sure Smith would be quite happy to put me in that category, and being that I've dared to ask questions, it follows that I am a 'Zionist agent').
I'll save the uncontrollable laughter for later, but that was June 10, and still no "evidence".
Later, he told Poseidon
In reality, they are three separate individuals.
In reality, Poseidon is not Peter Sault.
This is in response to Poseidon’s comment here
"The sort of conspiracy theorists who believe Smith are the same sort as those who believe ludicrous claims such as Nina = Gina = Eireann Goddess, or Jamie Linton = Brendon O'Connell = Fester = Lord Sidious, or Poseidon = Mike Piper / Scott Makufka / David Duke / scarlet bunnie / Peter Sault / Debus.". Smugly states Poseidon Sault.
All this nothing from someone who tried to convince Jim and I that Crimes of Zion was THE James Linton of the US Home Security when Jim and I already knew who he was and who he wasn't.
Who dreamed up wild theory after theory (like there being TWO Daryl's and the "Bin Laden is Daryl" theory).
This guy is a pure disinfo agent in the true sense, and I don't use the word disinfo lightly as some do.
Whereas Jim and I raised perfectly legitimate questions regarding the integrity of the TFC Peter Poseidon Sault takes it to the edge of insanity and beyond into the realm of fantastic theories that defy his much touted laws of physics.
Please be warned readers and Qrswave, you have a first class agent, with his team, destroying this site.
Since Poseidon Sault deems himself fit to hand out advice on how this site should be run and administered I agree with Nobadaddy’s assertion that Poser needs to be 'taken out' before he completely damages the integrity of WUFYS
Sault is totally evasive when it comes to things like this, this, this, and this (to list but only a few) yet has the hide to use this site as a base in which to launch attack after attack on, who Peter’s hero Piper described as being “The best Journalist in America; bar none” Christopher Bollyn and offers only speculation with no real evidence whatsoever in any of his spams.
Peter Sault exclaims:
"But, we should strive to avoid any degeneration into name-calling and fighting!
In this instance I disagree considering that we are dealing with a "Complete Wanker".
Hey, but wait a minute!
"The Daryl bin Laden hypothesis may seem a bit far-fetched, and the "two Daryls" theory may seem extravagant. But they cannot be completely ruled out. Both are independent hypotheses which do not require that the other be true."
Poseidon | Sun, 2007-06-10 03:00
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
A Collection Of Absurd Statements And Theories From The Webmaster Of TakeOurWorldBack.com
"In reality, Poseidon is not Peter Sault." States Crimes of Zion.
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Since having your artwork displayed throughout the café’s in Perth many a dealer (including including meth and dope ones) have been very interested in buying your work as investments.
Trouble is they can’t contact you on your home phone as they aren’t sure if you have one or not, much like you .
Your attempts to divert are legendary.
Eight Traits of Disinformationalists
GAHAHAHAHA. Oh man, Kerr, you are such a twat. Look at the convolution and posturing I find in your Crimes of Zion: Landline Lies page:
Take a look at what O'Connell said in the first place:
He said it almost like a threat. But of course, because I have no landline telephone, and the phone number he'd posted on the NOLAJBS forum was redundant, he was making promises he couldn't keep. So I said:
This is the kind of thing PlanetClouseau spends hours and hours writing about on the internet.
Aheh, heh. Kerr, you nonce. Ok look, this is from the "expose":
You've been going on about this for months Kerr, so listen up, it's this simple.
When I first got this laptop nearly two years ago now, which is my first computer, I brought it home and discovered, to my surprise, that I was already online. When I clicked on the IE icon (I use firefox now), the yahoo page came up, or whatever the default internet homepage is. Maybe it was a Toshiba page. Google is my homepage now. At the time, I had a friend staying here, Lance, who knew about computers (I knew five eighths of fuck all about computers), and he told me that that was impossible. But I was online, so it obviously was possible. It turned out that my swanky, fandangled new laptop had automatically tuned in wirelessly to my neighbour's connection.
I wasn't about to spend the $ on my own connection if I was getting it for free, so I just used theirs for the first 6 months or so, but it was temperamental because the signal was always 'low' or 'very low'. I was only able to use the net roughly 3/4 of the time. When Katie came over from Queensland with her own wireless laptop, it was no longer viable to use the neighbours' connection, because I didn't want to exceed their download limit, plus, Katie had an American internet boyfriend that she wanted to be in contact with without getting cut off by the crappy signal. It was her idea to get connected; I was happy putting up with the shitty connection.
She did the research from work on the best deal, she signed the contract with AAPT, and she paid the initial fee on her credit card. I paid her back my half in cash, and bought the wireless modem, because there was no way I was going from wireless to conventional.
So you see, when O'Connell posted my landline number on the NOLAJBS forum (a number I'd never seen before, I might add), I said I didn't have a landline, because a) I didn't have a landline telephone, and b) I'd forgotten that I had an actual landline, because I didn't set it up. I was used to being wireless (and I still was, but via my own connection). It wasn't so much that I'd forgotten as I never really realised I had one in the first place, believe it or not.
Now can you see why I'm always cracking up at your antics, Kerr? 'Linton is a Zionist operative ra ra ra..'
You're gonna have to make up your mind about whether or not I'm Brendon O'Connell, girls.
Your position is that I am B.O. Connell. If I am in fact B.O, then the meth info is disinformation entered into circulation by yours truly. If I'm not, then we have a situation whereby B.O is either telling you the truth, or he's not. What's it gonna be? Am I meth-head, or Brendon O'Connell? Which insult do you prefer?
"When I first got this laptop nearly two years ago now, which is my first computer, I brought it home and discovered, to my surprise, that I was already online. When I clicked on the IE icon (I use firefox now), the yahoo page came up, or whatever the default internet homepage is. Maybe it was a Toshiba page. Google is my homepage now. At the time, I had a friend staying here, Lance, who knew about computers (I knew five eighths of fuck all about computers), and he told me that that was impossible.
Where did you buy the laptop from? I want one just like it. Plug it in and Hey Presto! online without a connection, Internet Provider or dial up disc or ADSL modem, let alone a wireless one ("...and bought the wireless modem, because there was no way I was going from wireless to conventional.").
Sounds like it was all set up and ready for you to shill away because ther is NO WAY that your "swanky, fandangled new laptop had automatically tuned in wirelessly to my neighbour's connection."
You reside on quarter and half acre blocks at where you are.
If, and I say IF it was "possible" the idea of stealing your neighbours download quota isn't a nice thing to do eh? Nice of you to be concerned about their download usage though ("..didn't want to exceed their download limit.")
As it happens you lie again and NOTHING you scribbled above relates to anything that this addresses.
Again, another diversion which has revealed more of your lies.
Hahaha, of course it's possible you dickhead. The modem is on their end. Yup, most of the blocks around here are quarter acre, but my bedroom and the lounge-room are only about ten metres from where their modem is. Katie's room was further away, thus her desire for a private connection.
By the way, they knew I was using their connection. They refused to take money for our use of it.
Aheh, why? Because I point out how silly you are?
And all I'm doing is laughing at it!
But see, that's the thing - I haven't lost, because you're wrong, Kerr. You're wrong about everything. That is an incontrovertible fact.
In fact, every last one of your howlers are just that - howlers. What effect do you expect to have on me Kerr, do you expect me to read your "exposes" and get upset? I can't help but laugh!
This is my reply from the other thread that was closed. As narcissisists do, you will probably insist it is really an "attack".
The proposed meeting was not, as you are implying, to be some dodgy nocturnal rendezvous in a remote car park, but at a restaurant in the middle of the day at a busy motorway service station. I was even planning to eat bacon as evidence that I am not Jewish! It was in response to your statements complaining about pseudonyms like Fester and Poseidon being merely pieces of "HTML code". I just happened to have a week's holiday that week, and it was in the run-up to your important operation with the launch of the French Deception video that was supposed to "nuke Smith". I thought I could have proved that I'm a real person, and we could have discussed your imminent operation with the launch of the video. What did you think - I planned to poison you with polonium-210, or was going to hire a sniper?
Who are your "fifty other people" - will they provide any hints of their identities? How do you know they aren't pretending to go along with you because they've seen how you treat your "enemies"?
Daryl no longer supports Nina, and has claimed that she is plotting against him.
Jim, you silly plonker, my suggestion that loss of a relative could have been a factor in your eccentric, irrational, narcissistic, autistic behavior of the last few months was intended to exonerate you. And, far from denigrating your father's memory, it does the very opposite.
In at least three cases in the last few months, you have attacked former associates who had been corresponding with you, when they failed to continue bestowing you with sufficient praise or adulation and took issue with some of your ideas. Okay, so none of them (Crimes of Zion, Whippette and myself) were lifelong friends, but they had still been on friendly terms with you for a matter of weeks. Also, you attacked CoZ's friend apossumprincess because of some paranoid conspiracy theory.
Look at who goes around telling people to "go f*** yourself" and calling women "stupid cows / bitches", etc, and it will show you who has the more narcissistic tendencies.
I tried to exonerate you by assuming that this behavior was a recent, temporary phenomenon, and I then noticed the coincidence of the advent of this behavior with the loss of a family member. The implication of this assumption, that you were adversely affected by the loss of your father, is that you must have thought very highly of him. And since there must be quite a good correlation between how someone imagines a parent to be and how they really are, the induction is that your father was a very good man.
If you persist with this Poseidon = Peter Sault absurdity you are going to look even more silly. Why not just admit I am right, and apologise to me, Suzette, Nina and Jamie, and then we can forget it and move on?
No one is buying your "wireless" crap Zion. Its IMPOSSIBLE. Are you familiar with wireless to PC configuration? i.e. INDIVIDUAL PC's?
And you expect that people would believe that scenario of you actually letting your neighbour know that you were using their download quota and your neighbour saying "It's ok, no charge". LOL!
The fact is you COULD NOT have done what you claim simply because YOU HAVE TO HAVE A CONNECTION YOURSELF FROM AN INTERNET PROVIDER be it Telstra or AAPT.
You unsuccessfully came to Peter Sault's aid and have exposed yourself again.
Are you and Nina twins or do you both enjoy writing with 'italics' and those silly symbol headers?
Why do you insist on denying that you are Peter Sault?
You are going to look even more sillier than you already are.
Gawd Michael, you are so daft it is stunning.
Look. I used my neighbour's connection in the same way I use my own connection right now - wirelessly. As long as a connection is unsecured, there's no problem. My computer displays which networks are available in my area whether they're secured or not, and connects if possible. There is absolutely no difference between me using my own wireless connection and the guy's next door; it's a signal, as simple as that.
Maybe one of the other posters here can enlighten Mikhail.
Yes, Michael. You might be a tight-arse, but some people are quite friendly.
Heh heh, Kerr, you can't weasle out of it. Here is the email in question, right here, on your website. You know you deceived me, Kerr - stop trying to pussy out of it, you pussy.
It's times like this I'm actually happy that you're an unhappy, armless old man, Kerr.
That's the most piss-weak subterfuge I've ever seen. Nina wrote that to me, privately, telling me that I could divulge whatever I wished. I chose to divulge it to you, conditionally. We then made an agreement, which you shattered into tiny pieces. No one is buying that crap, Kerr.
It's easy to outsmart someone with deceit. The trustworthy are fucked over by the deceitful all the time. I'll give you that point, Kerr. You did outsmart me, but not because you're clever.
How is the "game" "up" for me, Kerr? What have you affected? Are there swarms of posters here jumping down my throat about me being Brendon O'Connell? Who besides you and Michael believe that crap? Has Mark Glenn stopped linking to Crimes of Zion? When I put the next blog out, will it be shunned and dismissed as 'disinfo'? Have I been banned from WUFYS or anywhere else? Have I lost any friends? Do I have any reason at all not to be happy?
Look out the window right now, Kerr. Is it not beautiful out there? Why should I skulk off to myspace because you keep publishing endless "exposes"? How would you react to someone publishing Jim Kerr "exposes" that were 80% wrong? You'd laugh too.
I published my mobile number on this forum for you to call me on fucking ages ago, Kerr. If you had have used it, we'd probably be friends right now. Could you really keep this secret agent / detective game up at the same time as hearing a down-to-earth voice on the other end of the phone? I know I couldn't. When Suzette called me, the first thing I did was laugh, and it was just natural that we became friends. Sometimes I think that's why you don't wanna call, because it would destroy your whole world view. What would you do with the endless pages of drivel you've written about me if you were to discover I was just a normal person? For fuck's sake Kerr, you need to wake up, bro. You have no idea how much we laugh at you.
With regard to your laptop you said that you "brought it home and discovered, to my surprise, that I was already online. When I clicked on the IE icon (I use firefox now), the yahoo page came up, or whatever the default internet homepage is."
In other words you are saying that you bought your laptop already configured to use wireless, and you were surprised?
This would mean that your PC was either stolen or possibly taken for non-payment of dope.
Either that or you HACKED into your neighbour's connection.
In other words you just don't buy a laptop and 'hey presto' your connected to the network whether it be your neighbour's or anybody else's for that matter.
YOU have to have an Internet Provider because to use your neighbour's connection you would have to know either the password or hack into it.
Whether your neighbour was/is using an "unsecured" connection or not does not simply allow you to plug in a laptop and 'hey presto' (that's assuming that your new fangled laptop came with a wireless facility installed in it, which if it did then this would have to have been done (legally) by a technician before being activated by the Internet Provider). It would be a chance in a million, like trying to guess a mobile number which leads me to believe that the laptop was stolen goods and considering it's marvelous ability to immediately connect to the internet via your neighbour's wireless connection would indicate that the laptop was NOT a new one, but one that was stolen from a resident or facility of some sort.
Had it had been a 'new' one from the shop (or back of it) there would be no built in facility for it to receive a wireless signal and IF you actually bought the laptop legally from a PC stockist WITH the facility to receive a wireless connection fitted then it would have come as NO SURPRISE to you that it in fact did just that the moment you "plugged it in".
Again lets see what you wrote:
"When I first got this laptop nearly two years ago now, which is my first computer, I brought it home and discovered, to my surprise, that I was already online. When I clicked on the IE icon (I use firefox now), the yahoo page came up, or whatever the default internet homepage is. Maybe it was a Toshiba page. Google is my homepage now. At the time, I had a friend staying here, Lance, who knew about computers (I knew five eighths of fuck all about computers), and he told me that that was impossible."
Your mate, Lance, was right.
Michael, as I say, you're an idiot. It wasn't stolen; it was bought brand new from Officeworks, $999.00 on special. It's a Toshiba L20 notebook. It does have the wireless capability built in. As I said, I knew nothing about computers; I didn't have the foresight to buy one with wireless capability; the fact that I bought one that did was just a fortuitous fluke.
Everything has to be a conspiracy with you. You're a fuckin' idiot.
Hey lying shill Peter, you evaded this
I see, so then everyone who buys a laptop like the one you got can just simply use everyone else's connection? Sorry, but that just does not happen. Even when you HAVE an internet provider yourself its damn near IMPOSSIBLE to get a connection away from home, never mind trying to bounce off someone else's signal. Like I said, secure or "unsecure" it's like trying to ring someone's mobile phone when you don't know the number.
Can you imagine the disruption chaos and confusion that would occur if people were simply be able to do what you claimed you did? Or do you think the network providers and PC designers overlooked this obvious "loophole".
Who said anything about a conspiracy? You did, not I.
Your a typical disinfo pleb.
Like "the attack on the USS Liberty was "a classic Israeli False Flag operation" tripe you peddle.
Grim to the rescue. I said before, who the fuck are you and why are you defending shills, liars and plebs likes CoZ?
Whats your problem?
What is so fucking great about a lying sack of meths who's only achievement to date is to make us who are serious about all this look like dope freaks and blasphemers?
Seems like WUFYS has been degenerating since these idiots appeared fron NOLAJBS and your protecting them?
Quite frankly if Qrswave cannot see the damage that these fuckwits are doing here then the site deserves to head down the sewer and these liars will appear elsewhere and do like wise.
Grim, the protector of liars.
is giving me a head ache!!
---------------------------------------
Pray the Rosary Daily
Yes, we sometimes take the piss out of ourselves.
So Michael now accuses me of "evading" points made in one of Kerr's exceptionally long-winded comments. (I hasten to add that I'm making an allowance for Michael's error in calling me "Peter".) However, Kerr's comment was posted fourteen minutes after I posted! I know I'm supposed to be "Professor" or "Doctor Sault", but even I have not mastered time travel!
And Grim's absolutely correct. Anyone who says that the attack on the USS Liberty was not an Israeli false-flag operation is either a shill or is deluded. Here is where I wrote (briefly) about the attack in my history of Zionist crimes:
http://www.takeourworldback.com/zionistcrimes.htm#ussliberty
Here is a page I found about "freeloaders" tapping in to wi-fi. It says that it is only illegal if done without consent, so if CoZ got permission from his neighbor it was perfectly legal:
Of course, it is only illegal to freeload off wi-fi networks if it is done using dishonest means. So, there's nothing to worry about if you have gotten consent from a neighbour. Often, they won't mind as long as it doesn't put them at any kind of loss. You must seek permission before ever attempting to use another's wireless connection.
Source