Breaking news - 9/11, 7/7, False Flag terrorism, Psyops against ordinary people/political classes and War on Freedom by Private Military companies and the mainstream media - current affairs.
Jayhawk wrote:
I think the number of OT supporters in the first few hours was certainly many more than in the last day or so. Seemed to me like he had a load of trolls lined up!
I had the same thought myself Jayhawk, I picked up on the article on the first day and posted a few times but there were seemingly loads of bookers OT supporters calling us all names but not actually providing any sort of adult debate from their side.So I think on balance as most of us provided a clear and rational criticism of both bookers shocking article and the official nonsense in the face of a stream of juvenile hysteria.
I post on cif under the name weneedanswers
Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut, that held its ground.
David Icke
there is another thread much more balanced IMO over at cif http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... eptember11
if anyone wants to post some sense to counteract all the mindless OT supporters it can only help IMO.even if it is only a little
Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut, that held its ground.
David Icke
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... eptember11
Another more open minded thread with the author getting fairly close to criticism of Booker's ludicrous thread from a few days ago.
IMO it worth giving it a few posts to counteract the OT supporters,I understand this stance may seem petty to some but CIF still has the potential to open a few eyes if the case is laid out in a calm logical manner
see you there my name over there is weneedanswers
Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut, that held its ground.
David Icke
Good comments on CiF Mr Nice
Poor old critical thinker can't get the hang of not shouting online though!
It's a better discussion with a lot less insults at least.
Why is that the Guardian journalists AFTER 7 years are having a debate on 9/11?
Does that imply that we will have to wait 7 years from 7/7 to have a debate about that around 2012? That in and of itself is an issue how the media controls debates and chooses subjects to debate only when it sees fit.
There is probably an explanation which may be a conspiracy after all.
The powers that be have realised the 'war on terror' is dead. Soon there will be a new man in the White House.They are allowing a modicum of debate to let people take off some steam and win arguments and in the meantime real conspiracies continue like the economic conflicts behind 'climate change', genetically modified food, and weather manipulation technology such as chemtrails etc.
Whilst the points made by Dan Hind are all valid they are some 5 decades old. The role of journalists was to explain and educate what is happening around us now, not what happened so long ago. So as far as his comments are correct his aim is sinister like most journalists. He has a hidden agenda and Charlie Booker is the straw man here.
One must take with a pinch of salt anything someone says about an issue he never mentioned and appears to be interested in the 'truth' when in reality what is happening is the medias coopting of the 'truth' movement...
provided a clear and rational criticism of both bookers shocking article and the official nonsense in the face of a stream of juvenile hysteria.