I presented the photos, the security camera pictures, the witness statements so that DU discussants can draw their own conclusions apart from who I am, what I've said or think. Did boloboffin comment on this evidence? Let's see exactly what he did say and let me answer all of his questions, as he answered not one of mine.
How interesting that he had, from my 10,000 posts these particular stories from such diverse locations and on such diverse topics -- none related to the Pentagon attack and the evidence I wanted you to examine and respond to.
================
boloboffin:
Do you still stand by this statement?
"Let me warn the Israelis and ADL zionists who have been waging a war of ridicule against this evidence of the guilt of Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz and other zionist Jews (and of gentiles too, make no mistake) and of Mossad working with the CIA and MI6 -- that by helping to obstruct justice, by helping to suppress public disclosure of this crime by zionists -- you make the crime done by neo-con zionists and Likud zionists and Mossad zionists into a crime by ADL, and Israelis, and, by an unfair but inevitable overgeneralization that people learning the truth about 9-11 are bound to make, a coverup crime by "Jews" as a group -- choosing to protect mass-murderers of 3000 people and provacateurs who engineered two wars in phony "retaliation" and "terrorist hunting" against people known to be wholly innocent."
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/9-11-demonstrative-evidence-of-frameup/message/12============
Eastman:
Yes. I stand by that statement, and I invite DU to look for examples of what I am talking about on the forums of this stie.
It is a common principle that once a person becomes aware of the guilt of a murderer through evidence that is presented to him, then, if he persists in throwing a barrage of ridicule and heckling to block investigators from getting the information of guilt out -- then they become accomplices. I have seen people doing everything to turn people from simple presentations of photographic evidence and discussion of the obvious by-direct-inspection implications of that evidence which points to fact that the Pentagon was hit by a smaller aircraft that fired a missile while the Beoing flew over, hidden by the explosion in its rear and almost immediately afterwarded becoming blended into the Reagan National Airport background just one mile from the crash flyover point. The evidence is overwhelming. And when presented these people turn of the barer of the news and attack him -- even thought my standing, my intelligence, my prejudice, my vices, my unfairness etc. has nothing to do with what the evidence (pictures taken by witnesses and security camera pictures released by the Pentagon) shows -- unequivocally shows as soon as it is pointed out.
Yes, the ADL is functioning as an accomplice to the coverup -- and most of the day-after-day hecklers who specialize,not in counter argument or counter evidence,but in tomato-throwing -- are all to obviously running interference for those they know to be mass-murderers and traitors to this country and to humanity -- in fact fascist racist brand Zionists.
You bring up, what I say -- but you nowhere comment on the photo evidence, the witness testimony, the video recording pictures that show that a killer jet much smaller than the Boeing and an air-to-ground missile killed the Naval Intelligence Personel who were not going along with Rumsfeld-Wolfowitz-Perle treason at the Pentagon.
NOW, AS MY FIRST IMPRESSION OF YOU IN OUR FIRST EXCHANGE -- I NOTE THAT YOU COME BACK WITH AN ANSWER SO FAST THAT YOU COULD NOT HAVE EVEN LOOKED AT THE PHOTOS OF THE WALL, THE VIDEO SEQUENCE SHOWING THE ATTACK AND THE WITNESS TESTIMONY AND THE WAY THAT THESE TAKEN TOGETHER CONSISTENTLY TELL THE STORY THAT IS SO AT ODDS WITH THE OFFICIAL FRAME-UP/COVER-UP VERSION. AND THAT YOU HAVE LOOKED FOR STATEMENTS OF MINE THAT ARE CONTROVERSIAL - HOPING TO APPEAL TO THE TIMIDITY OF THE AVERAGE FRIGHTENED DISCUSSANT IN THESE TIMES SAYING: "THIS MAN HAS MADE STRONG STATEMENTS! BETTER COVER YOUR EYES AND NOT LOOK AT THE PHOTOS AND WITNESS STATEMENTS HE WANTS TO SHOW YOU"
THAT SAID, LET'S SEE WHAT ELSE YOU'VE GOT.
===================
boloboffin:
Or this one?
I have long been convinced that Hillary Clinton was behind the Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman murders that created the distraction the night before the very day Hillary became the first First Lady to testify in a criminal investigation. I also know that she was involved in serious economic crime when she received criminal payment for corrupt services in the form of a million-to-one (i.e. impossible to come by honestly) illegally manipulated first-timer bonanza killing in the commodities futures speculation. Also, that she had one of the Secret Service men she detested, a man who might have heard too much, transferred to Okalahoma city -- to perish in the bombing of the Murrah Federal Building there, even as the drug-trade-dealing BATF chose to be away from the office that day. And there is the Vince Foster murder. If Mrs. Olsen is in the hands of Hillary Clinton and her associates now, I am sure she would much rather be in the Atlantic trench.
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/not_crashed.htm==========
Eastman:
Yes. Lee the New York forensics man said that two people had to have committed the crime. People ignore the footprint outside the window. The first jury got it right. But Hillary Clinton was to be the first First Lady ever to be questioned by a special prosecutor in a crinminal inquiry that would discuss potentially her commodities deal (million to one odds kill on her first try -- obvious payoff by the people who also, later on, made her Senator of New York), the death of Foster, Whitewater etc. -- and so one the night before the hearing Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman are murdered and OJ is blamed and the entire major news media becomes unglued drowning out the Whitewater investigation questioning of the First Lady. And of course the Murrah building could not have sustained that dammage by a feritlizer bom-- independent experts agree that internal charges had to be set. And yes, one of the White House secret service agents that Hillary despised (she despised them all -- Agent Aldrich quotes her telling secret service agents who get to close and might overhear her conversations to "Fucking back off!" etc.)was reassigned to the Murrah Building where he died in the bombing -- even as the BATF chose not to show up for work that day. And of course this event, according to Clinton, saved his presidency, casting the patriot and militia movements in the light of proto-terrorists and extremists, rather than the constitutionalists alarmed by Waco, which they really were and are. And Barbara Olsen could not have made the cell phone calls -- her husband is lying. Olsen is either dead, or she was a CIA agent under deep cover who is now reassigned with a new identity (or else in retirement). That sounds absurd only if you have not taken the trouble to look at the photo evidence and the witness testimony and been thouroughly convinced that the Boeing did not and could not have crashed into the first floor and tunneled through to the C-ring as the actual killer jet in fact did. Once that is established then the issues discussed above are put in proper proportion and the high-probability scenarios seem like the only logical possibility. (Once you know that a man is murderer with a long police record, you begin to suspect that maybe he could have done things you would not suspected his chummy and likable self of doing before you found out.
So what else?
===============
boloboffin:
How about this one?
It is clear that the contrails are being made on a massive scale; that the project and the agencies are secret; that the media is not interested in even considering the question (although I understand the internet has been reporting curious 'crisscrossing' contrail activity for years--I have observed this phenomenon for more than two years.
*snip*
============
Eastman:
I am the man who debunks the notion that so-called "chemtrails" deliberate poisoning. I am the man who presents the actual air force documents and NASA documents that describe technology of creating cloud cover that will reflect back sunlight, causing the ground and sea surfaces in patches below to be cooler than otherwise, heating the close-to-ground less, which means less convection, which means higher-than-otherwise pressure, which means the ability to block and re-direct the otherwise movement of parcels of wet, dry, cold or warm air. Physicists, meteorologists acknowledge the correctness of the atmospheric physics and the development of the computing and real-time world-around inputting of data that the system would require --
In short, what I say I say for good reason.
Read my presentation on clandestine weather modification:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/weather_ops/message/1Btw, and Israeli meterologist contacted me after reading one of my articles and told me that 22 percent of Israeli rainfall is generated by weather modification. Don't you believe weather modification is possible, boloboffin?
And evaluating your question -- you, bolo my good woman, have avoided any discussion of the photo evidence -- the presence of the smoke trail (is that not worth mentioning? is that not worth even a word of response??? and so instead you look through my 10,000 googlegroups postings and come up with the above specimens in an effort to convince people that I am to controversial on other topics for discussants here to even look at the photgraphs of the evidence and the statements of the witnesses that I want to show you -- so that you on your own --not on my word, not one my authority, -- but DU discussants on their own can look at the data and draw their own conclusions!!!!
Is weather modification a public function, analogous to military protection, postal service, or highway construction? Or is it a private, non-governmental function? If the latter, is it a private function vested with a public interest, as had been determined to be the case, for example, in rail or air transportation? ... Or is weather modification an ordinary,lawful business, subject only to reasonable regulation, as in the manufacture and sale of clothing? This view raises questions about property rights, i.e., who owns the clouds?
So far my little Google search for statements from you has turned up some fun stuff, hasn't it? Zionists, Hillary, OJ, and chemtrails. But this one really has thrown me for a loop. I'm sure you wrote all the above quotes, and anybody can go and read them in the original context. But this one is just surreal. It does go on about Zionists, and definitely has the mark of someone stunned by the events of 9/11. But did you really write this open letter to President Bush?
Yes. My letter to Bush made it clear that there was no grounds for attacking Afganistan -- the Taliban are innocent of 9-11 everyone at DU should know -- and if you want to kill Taliban, I told Bush, then you might as well come after me because I now am a self-apointed member of the Taliban as of that moment. It was masterful politics, given the limitations of my position at the time. This was my way of getting attention to my protest of unjust and unjustified aggression. (Elsewhere in the letter -- you do not quote it for some reason -- I stated correctly that Mullah Omar had offered to turn over bin Laden to Bush if Bush would only provide him with some evidence of his guilt -- which is the ordinary international agreements protocol of providing a country with the basis of the charge whenm seeking extradition of a malefactor. Omar did the right and honorable thing-- and I did the right and honorable think in defending him.
BUT AGAIN NOTE -- I ASK YOU TO RESPOND TO THE SMOKE TRAIL IN THE PICTURE RELEASED BY THE PENTAGON, AND TO NOT THE TOO-SHORT KILLER JET, AND THE TOO-WHITE-HOT EXPLOSION, AND THE TOO-SMALL HOLE THAT WILL NOT ACCOMODATE A STARBOARD WING ENGINE -- AND DO YOU RESPOND??
HELL NO -- RATHER, FROM 10,000 POSTS YOU PICK QUOTATIONS ON WEATHER, WHITEWATER, AND MY EFFORTS TO DISUADE BUSH FROM ATTACKING AFGANISTAN TO PRESENT YOUR EXCUSE FOR NOT LOOKING AT THE PHOTOS, NOT COMPAING WITNESS STATEMENTS (WHAT RISKUS AND LAGASSE HAVE WRITTEN TO ME ABOUT WHAT THEY SAW ETC.), AND THE PHOTOS OF WITNESSES AT THE CRASH.
finally you say this,
=====================
boloboffin:
Stop wasting our time, Mr. Eastman. There's an election going on, in case you haven't noticed.
========
Eastman: And that is boloboffin's "9-11 joke" -- I present the photos, the witness testimony, the security cam picture sequence, showing the too-small plane, the missile smoke trail, the huge white-hot missile warhead explosion, the photos of the holes, the two paths given by testimony and evidence of the killer jet from the southwest that crashed and teh Boeing which came from over the Sheraton, over the Naval Annex and over the gas station which overflew the crash and landed at Reagan -- AND BOLOBOFFIN COMMENTS ON NONE OF IT -- BUT DIGS THROUGH 10,000 POSTINGS TO DISCREDIT ME AND COMES UP WITH ONLY CREDITIABLE, WELL-ARGUED AND STRONG-CASE PRESENTATIONS THAT HAVE ONLY THIS DEFECT, THAT THEY ARE HIGHLY CONTROVERSIAL. THUS BOLOBOFFIN IS ARGUING LIKE THIS:
PEOPLE SOMETIMES ILLOGICALLY REJECT A PROPOSITION THEY ARE UNCOMFORTABLE WITH.
PEOPLE ARE UNCOMFORTABLE WITH CONTROVERSIAL POSITIONS.
DICK HAS EVIDENCE THAT I WANT PEOPLE TO REJECT.
THEREFORE I WILL SHOW DU DISCUSSANTS DICK'S MOST CONTROVERSIAL POSITIONS AMONG HIS THOUSANDS OF POSTINGS OVER SEVERAL YEARS.
I don't think it will work, boloboffin.
I think people will look at the too-short aircraft, the too-small hole, the wrong approach path by the Boeing (that doesn't line up with downed lamp posts and holes in the Pentagon walls), the many problems with the debris (only one engine, confetti like wreckage indicative of a blown missile casing, planted piece on the lawn, no passenger chairs, no luggage in any photo or written account of witnesses inside the building before it was taken down etc.) -- I think Du discussants will look at those pictures and reach the same very unpleasant conclusion I and many others have reached -- namely that the neo-cons at the DoD are heavily implicated in the planning and execution and coverup of the attack on the Pentagon.
And that is no joke.
Dick Eastman
Yakima, Washington
Every man is responsible to every other man.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(16 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
