Robert Fisk and the closet of media 9/11 self-censorship
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.
We will never get to the truth about the 9-11 attacks on New York and Washington so long as journalists like Robert Fisk do not acknoweldge that the attacks were caried-out by Zionists, and not Arabs. Fisk refers to Mohamed Atta as "the Egyptian hijacker-murderer" thus implying that Arab hijackers were responsible. Instead of congratulating Fisk for his 'courage', it might be a better idea to supply him with some clues that would point him in the right direction since Robert Fisk is evidently barking up the wrong tree.
This is what Fisk said just over a year ago:
"And all across the Muslim world, "we" - the West, America, Israel - are fighting not nationalists but Islamists. And watching the martyrdom of Lebanon this week - its slaughtered children in Qana packed into plastic bags until the bags ran out and their corpses had to be wrapped in carpets - a terrible and daunting thought occurs to me, day by day. That there will be another 9/11."
In other words, Islamists were the perpetrators of 9-11.
Hardly the basis for congratulations Majid.
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.
... I appreciate your concerns, and agree that Fisk doesn't go far enough. I never claimed that.
The points I raised were not that Fisk "doesn't go far enough", my concerns specifically addressed the fact that he doesn't go anywhere near the truth at all. On the contrary, Fisk heads in the exact opposite direction. He claims Arabs/Islamists carried-out 9-11, I say it was Zionists. Anyone who steers people away from this fact has to be treated with caution. It is not as if Fisk is ignorant of middle-east politics.
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.
You are incorrect Majid. The Daily Mail published an article around this time last year titled Flight 93 Was Shot Down Claims Book. This article, however, has since been Orwelled. It is available on my website though. The Guardian also raised questions back in 2002. Although you have been researching 9-11 since you were fifteen, you appear to have overlooked both these articles published by British newspapers.
"Sure, Fisk first does the whole disclaimer thing....."
Indeed he does. This could hardly be considered to be courageous journalism.
Sure, it may be a ploy to suck people towards the officially sanctioned 'incompetence' theory...
I concur. Damage-limitation seems to be the objective.
....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.
He isn't telling us we don't already know. If Fisk has only just begun to discover all these facts six years after the event, then he clearly has been rather slow on the uptake. That he believes Arabs/Islamists to be the culprits of the 9-11 attacks is a sufficient enough reason, in my opinion, for an anti-Zionist to ignore him rather congratulate him.
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.
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."
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.
This is further reason to ignore him. I'm perplexed as to how a journalist who has lived among Palestinian Arabs in Beirut for twenty-five years arrives at the conclusion that Arabs carried-out the 9-11 attacks. I would have thought that there would be plenty of Palestinian Arabs who would know that Zionists were the perpetrators.
Just because I congratulate him for something doesn't mean I agree or congratulate him for ALL his views.
I made no reference to any of the other opinions that Fisk may have. I challenged you specifically on the point that Fisk believes Islamists/Arabs to be the culprits of 9-11. 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.
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.
As I have already pointed-out, Fisk isn't telling us anything that we don't already know. More to the point, are those of who believe 9-11 to be a Zionist operation hindered or helped by Fisk in our endeavour to get the truth out about who was really behind 9-11? Does it help our cause to have journalists proclaiming that Arabs were the perpetrators? I think not.
I'm just saying, there's not as clear evidence of him being an obfuscator like Chomsky and Palast.
But there is clear evidence of Robert Fisk not having the foggiest idea about who was really behind the 9-11 attacks. From an anti-Zionist perspective, Fisk is a liability rather than an asset.
If we attack him, that may put him off. If he sees support in numbers, he may go further.
Then again, he might not. He could just as easily maintain his current stance of Islamists/Arabs being the culprits. Whether you would like to take a chance on someone who is heading in the opposite direction of the truth is entirely your choice. I choose to ignore him. If and when Fisk begins to address the Israeli angle of 9-11, I'll start listening.
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.
As anti-Zionists, would we not reap more rewards for our efforts if we were to extend our support only to journalists who are not afraid to speak the truth about 9-11 being a Zionist job - journalists such as Christopher Bollyn? Why should we support someone who believes that Arabs did it? Would this not be counter-productive and contrary to our common goal in exposing the Zionists behind the 9-11 attacks? 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?
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 looks like you're in a minority of one here Majid. The opinions expressed by Fester, myself, Michael, Qrswave and Latin American View summate the fact Robert Fisk is very much a 'Johnny come lately' vis a vis the 9-11 attacks. 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.
With regard to your WUFYS of Monkey Zerg, this is not the name by which you introduced yourself to me on MySpace last year when you requested that I add you to my contact list. Since you introduced yourself to me last year on MySpace as Majid, it is by that name that I know you, and it will be by that name that I address you here on Wake Up From Your Slumber. To be blunt, I really don't care what your particular individual preference might be Majid. I know you as Majid, and that is the name I will use to address you.
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.
Considering that you spend most of your time here attacking the reputation and research of Christopher Bollyn, it really is beyond chutzpah to for you to attempt to defend Robert Fisk. Bollyn says that Zionists carried-out the 9-11 attacks and has produced a plethora of evidence in support of his claims - evidence which you take great delight in attempting to discredit. That you consistently attack a journalist who tells the truth about who really carried-out the 9-11 attacks while offering excuses for another who would have us believe that Arabs were the perpetrators leave us in doubt that you are indeed a hypocritical twat of the highest order.
All we ever hear from you is suppose this, suppose that. There is no supposing on this issue. Fisk has unequivocally stated that Arabs were responsible for 9-11 yet here you are yelling us that this is "disheartening." It is truly astonishing that you recommend Fisk as "a better source for beginners", such is your hatred of Christopher Bollyn. You would rather people flocked to hear the words of a journalist who believes Arabs to be the culprits than listen to another who speaks the truth about 9-11. Bollyn has been exposing the Zionists who carried-out the 9-11 attacks for years. Fisk is very much a 'Johnny come lately'. Despite this fact, you consider it a good idea for people to ignore Bollyn but listen to Fisk. You are a disgrace Poseidon. A traitor. You make me sick.
I hasten to add that I do not have a famous secret alter ego, much as the tinfoil brigade would like to speculate
You just couldn't resist slipping that in, could you Peter? But now that you have. let's discuss it, shall we? Who said that you had a "famous" alter ego? Please direct me to wherever you saw this claim because it is not one with which I am familiar. Unless your parents were a pair of imbeciles who christened you Poseidon, it is self-evident that you have an alter-ego. Michael, Quasimodo, myself and around three-dozen other people say that you are Peter Sault. There exists a multitude of quite remarkable similarities between the creep who runs the takeourworldback.com website and Peter Sault.
Since you have denied that you are Peter Sault, you have no other option but to continue denying your true identity. Have it your way Peter, we'll do this the hard way then, shall we? Let's begin with Peter Sault's personal website ODEION. By adding his initials PS we have an anagram of Poseidon. Coincidental? I think not. Sault is a proficient mathematician as are you. Sault likes to bash his organ, as do you. No surprise there given that you are a wanker. Sault also shares your tendency to write English words such as behaviour as behavior. 'Coincidental', you'll no doubt tell us. I think not.
I have a challenge for you Peter Psychiatrist - why not post a photograph of yourself on that disinformation website you and others unkown operate, along with verifiable proof of your location in England. It's that simple Peter. That's all you need to do to end speculation by the "tinfoil brigade." Can you do that Peter? Can you resist this diamond opportunity to blow the "tinfoil brigade" out of the water, or is your Narcissistic Personality Disorder of such a magnitude that you believe yourself to be of such great importance to the anti-Zionist movement, and to reveal yourself would surely lead to the Zionists assassinating you? Are you that deluded? Is your paranoia that severe?
Maybe you're just a gutless, yellow-bellied, self-righteous prick who can only attack others from behind the safety of his computer screen. God of the ocean? King of the cowards morelike. You decree that we need not apply rigorous standards of proof in respect of your utterly ridiculous theory of Christopher Bollyn being a Zionist agent. Fair enough shill, the same standard will be applied to you also.
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.
Looks to me as though Planet Quo reamed you a new one, Mr. Chicken of the Sea P'sidemself-- and made some great and irrefutable points besides, re: Fisk and the Bollyn (who had been exposing the Zionist/ Israeli connection to 9/11 since the day it happened), &c. Vale.
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.
PlanetKwerr busts his own edict, in which he said he would take the personal spam off WUFYS and restrict it to his own website.
Get your facts straight before your open your big, lying mouth Pissodeion.
As I understand it, the word edict means a decree issued by a sovereign authority, or an authoritative proclamation or command. What particular sovereign authority do you consider me to be. Do tell, Professor Sault. My exact words were:
"Whenever I should wish to address the comments and statements that my opponents, detractors and enemies make, I will do so here, here, here and here, not via Wake Up From Your Slumber. Perhaps Whippette, A Possum Princess, Crimes of Zion, Geeez and Poseidon will follow my example, and in future use their own webspace should they wish to address me, instead of using Qrswave's."
This is a statement you buffoon, not a 'proclamation' or a 'command'. I appreciate that despite being an excellent writer, you nonetheless experience great difficulty with simple words. You evidently do not understand what an edict is. Other words that you have a problem with are simple words like harbour and behaviour. This is how we spell these words over here in England. You should know that being an Englishman living in England. Strange then Peter, that you write these words as harbor and behavior.
While you deny that your true identity is Peter Sault, you cannot deny that Sault, like yourself, is an Englishman who currently resides in England. Nor can you deny that Peter Sault and Poseidon share the same peculiar idiosyncrasy of writing English words in the style that an American would. I draw the readers attention to the words capitalization and capitalized. Yet another of the many 'coincidences' that Peter Poseidon Sault refuses to acknowledge or discuss.
With regard to my 'edict', I refrained from making any posts or comments on this website for two months. Removing myself from the fray, I thought, might lead to a reduction in the discord that has befallen Wake Up From Your Slumber since Injected Meths a.k.a. Grams of Heroin followed me here from MySpace, and declared war within hours of him first appearing here. And no matter how justified your drug-dealing team mate may feel in coming here to protect A Poison Abscess, and no matter how hard the chimp attempts to lie and obfuscate, Criminal of Zion cannot re-invent history.
Orangutan featuresstates unequivocally that there are two reasons for this war: "allegations against Nina" and an alleged breach of the conditions I "obtained the email from Nina that was posted on the NOLAJBS forum by Suzette." That is what Monkey Meths of Mount Lawley said. Those are the Chimp's words, not mine. Linton must have been high on Amphetamines and Cannabis when he wrote that because at the that particular point in time as I had not received any e-mail from his darling Nina whatsoever.
So, let's cut the crap Poseidon, and stick to the facts, difficult as that may be for a habitual liar such as yourself. Your team mate is the root cause of all this fighting. He kicked it off with this post on 16th May. An inconvenient fact for you and your crew to have to live with, but a fact nonetheless. And that fact will always remain a fact no matter what propaganda you and your associates may choose to wrap around it.
My hiatus from Wake Up From Your Slumber did not lead to a reduction in the fighting. On the contrary, it got worse. Even in my absence, I was still being attacked. Neither yourself, Grams of Heroin, A Poison Abscess or Sleazette the Muppette, Defender of Blasphemers followed my example. The four of you continued to use this website as a base for launching attacks on me. In view of this, all bets are off. I've changed my mind - I'm back. And if that is a problem for the Quack Quartet, then tough. Get used to it. As long as you four are here attacking me, then I'll be here hitting back - assuming, of course, that I don't get banned for doing so. I would much rather engage you and your creepy crew via our websites, and via MySpace, but you lot much prefer this venue, don't you?
I'm not going to bother feeding the trolls, except to show what Kerr said about MonkeyZerg in emails to me
So then, you slithering, slimey snake, what exactly did I say about Majid during the brief period that I was in e-mail contact with you? Let's take a look then Peter Poseidon.
PlanetQuo Thursday 5th July:
"We have also been on the Smith thread by MonkeyZerg. Monkey Zerg is better known on MySpace as Majid":
"I think Majid's friend list tells us where his loyalties lie!!!!"
"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. From the very outset of discovering the deception on NOLAJBS, I've worked on the theory that a small team of shills are operating multiple profiles in multiple forums, and this appears to yet another example."
Poseidon Friday 6th July:
"I only knew the MonkeyZerg character as an irregular poster at WUFYS, and believed him/her to be a genuine anti-Zionist. When away from the forum for a time, MonkeyZerg would claim to have been "studying" - rather like truebeliever's going on holidays! Majid has DBS and Nina as friends at myspace, and claims to be a Palestinian Muslim student. So now it appears that MonkeyZerg is Nina, which would explain why this "neutral observer" speaks in support of TFC, and Linton is "his" mate.....
Who else do we know of who signs their comments with 'peace'? Fester! If the team cover for each other, that can account for each handle's round the clock posting times.
According to MonkeyZerg's myspace blog: hyperlink ... "he" is a 21YO based in Edinburgh. On there, he promotes DBS and suports Bollyn."
I was the first to make reference to Monkey Zerg. I correctly state that Monkey Zerg is known on MySpace as Majid. I then state that Monkey Zerg's friend list tells us where his loyalties lie. I was, of course, drawing your attention to the fact that Majid is a friend and associate of your team mates Linton and Nina. Linton posted a message on Majid's MySpace profile the day after he began attacking me. Linton thanks his "brother" for the support and concern he has expressed for their mutual friend Nina. Whatever support and concern Majid expressed for his friend Nina was certainly not expressed here on Wake Up From Your Slumber. Given Majid's stated support for Nina, and given his friendship with Linton, why should anyone be surprised to learn that I am wary of this person?
I then stated that Monkey Zerg bears all the hallmarks of another of the multiple pseudonyms that Nina operates under. This is an entirely different statement from one wherein Nina is stated to be Monkey Zerg. Yet despite me never having said that Monkey Zerg is Nina, Poseidon the liar comes out with this demonstrable lie:
....according to Kwerr, apossumprincess = Nina = Gina = Eireann Goddess = MonkeyZerg = nearly half the people on the internet....
You are a dirty, lying bastard Sault, and your bare-faced lie is here for everyone to see. Not only do you have the chutzpah to post lies and delude yourself that you can get away with it, you yourself stated that "it appears that MonkeyZerg is Nina." You conveniently 'forgot' to make any reference to this fact, just as you conveniently 'forgot' to post a link to the page on Take Our Wurlitzer Back where these e-mails have been posted. You then stated that Monkey Zerg appearing to be Nina "would explain why this "neutral observer" speaks in support of TFC." Those are your words Sault, that is exactly what you said. Not only do you suggest that Monkey Zerg is Nina, you also suggest that Monkey Zerg is Fester.
According to you, Monkey Zerg is Fester as well as being Daryl Bradford Smith AND Eric Hufschmid. You are a complete and utter numpty, Sault get real you clown. Being the shill that you are, you have no sense of shame - your bare-faced lies do not cause you any embarrassment, even when put on public display for all to see. That's all you do Sault, lie and deceive. Such is your desperation, you are forced to rely upon e-mail correspondence to try and discredit me, and you can't even tell the truth about the content of an e-mail. 'Pathetic' doesn't begin to describe you.
Of course, Kerr's suggestion, that MonkeyZerg was somehow deceitful, was absurd.
There you again. Yet another bare-faced lie. You can't help yourself, can you? Where in any of my previous posts on this blog did I "suggest" that "Monkey Zerg was somehow deceitful"? Where did I "suggest" this, you deceitful, lying piece of trash? The discussion here was all about Robert Fisk and 9-11 until you turned it into a crapfest. This blog was not about you, you arrogant, pompous, self-important, narcissistic prick. You need to see a shrink, Sault. You need psychiatric treatment to help cure the acute pyschological condition that you are evidently suffering from (Falsehoods Unbelievably Crass Knowlingly Expressed Disorder). You're F-U-C-K-E-D Poseidon - well and truly. People are becoming wise to your lies, deception and trickery. You're a drowning man Peter Sault. You really hit a raw nerve when you used the death of my father to attack me, and for your Brendon O'Connell impersonation, you will pay a heavy price indeed. Your card has been marked.
I would not normally post the content of private emails without permission.
For three months solid, that drug-dealing, blaspheming, low-life sack of pus knownhere as Crimes of Zion has been wailing like a demented banshee about me supposedly 'betraying' him by passing an e-mail to Spazette the Gimpette, Defender of Shills which A Poison Pillpusher sent to Grams of Heroin who ulimately sent it to me. As can be gleaned from Junkie Linton's very first post on the Daryl Bradford Smith Indicted blog, this e-mail - which Nina had already authorised Linton to disclose to whomever he wished - is the sole basis upon which he has attempted to discredit me. How ironic it is, then, that Poseidon then published on his website, an e-mail he received from me wherein I specifically state in bold capital letters - FOR YOUR EYES ONLY - NOT FOR REPUBLICATION. Did I come here whingeing like a spoilt brat? Did I come here complaining of how I had been betrayed? No, I did not. I said not a word .
The sheer hypocrisy on display here is truly astonishing. All this fighting boils down to the fact that some Australian junkie I deleted from my contact list decided to come here to fight on behalf his "totally innocent" darling "little girl" of a friend. All this discord over an e-mail. All this fighting caused by a Junkie criminal, all over an irresponsible trollop who gives Ecstasy pills to schoolkids. This is Team Poseidon folks - a collective of liars, drug-dealers, blasphemers, amateur psychologists, and shills.
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.
Yeah, you would say that, wouldn't you Peter. Well listen-up you tosser, I don't give a fuck about what what you fail to see you arse-licking, grovelling, toad. If I choose to address Monkey Zerg as Majid, what concern is this of yours? Piss-off and mind your own business, you shit-stirring, dickhead. Monkey Zerg introduced himself to me as Majid. This is how I became acquainted with him, that is the name by which I will address him. If either of you have objections to this, then too bad. When people are posting messages in different forums using different pseudonym, I'll decide which of these pseudonyms I prefer to address them by.
As far as I am concerned, when an individual is operating under multiple handles they forfeit the right to demand that they are known by only the one. That's the price you pay when you choose to have multiple identities. What is it with these MySpacers? Monkey Zerg here, but Majid over there. Infensus Mentis it is on MySpace, Crimes of Zion here. A Possum Princess here, Nina on MySpace. Why can't people just choose one unique identifying handle, and stick with it?
Qrswave asks me: "what if I changed my handle and asked you to call me only by my new handle? Would you object?" Well Q, the answer is no, I wouldn't since, as far as I know, you post under one pseudonym only. It would therefore make no difference to me. If on the other hand, you had multiple identities, why should I be compelled to address you by only one? That people choose to operate under multiple identities indicates that they do not have any particular preference for one handle or the other. If an individual prefers one name over another, then why operate under several? This makes no sense to me at all. So long as Monkey Zerg is operating on MySpace as Majid, that is his name as far I am concerned, since it is via MySpace that I know him, and not WUFYS. When he becomes Monkey Zerg on MySpace, Monkey Zerg is the name I will address him by.
With characters such as Kerr, the normal rules of netiquette do not apply.
Thank you Peter for confirming that you are indeed a double-mindeed hypocrite of the highest degree. See Qrswave, I can be civil whenever I choose to be - I just said 'thank you' to Peter Sault. Now I'm going to be uncivil, and tell the twat to go fuck himself. Go fuck yourself Sault.
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.
This is a strange way of "keeping the personal stuff off WUFYS".
Since you have enclosed part of your statement within quotations marks, I challenge you to produce the source of this quote. Who said it, where was it made, when was it made? While I appreciate that you're a sophisticated guy who prefers complication to simplicity, your superior intellect should nonetheless allow you to rise to this very simple challenge that I have put to you. Can you do that Peter? Are you able to perform this basic task? Produce the evidence that will qualify the statement you have made. Take as long as you like.
In my previous I explained why I have returned to engage you. Did you read it Peter? Perhaps it didn't sink in. Go back and read it again. Dwell on what I said for a moment. I came back here because you used the death of my Father to attack me. I didn't nibble on the other pieces of chum that you and your crew threw my way, but there was no way you were going to get away with attacking me by claiming that my father's death has somehow led me to developing a psychological condition that you and the other members of your team of unqualified, untrained, psychiatrists refer to as Narcissistic Personality Disorder. So here I am you degenerate cunt. Back on WUFYS, and right in YOUR face. Get used to it. You'll get no peace from me until you apologise for your unwarranted, way below the belt remarks. Can you do that Peter? Show us that you are humble man, and not an arrogant, narcissistic, lowlife piece of shite. Apologise, and I'll back off. Stick to your guns, and I'll get VERY personal with you indeed. Do I make myself clear? This is your last chance Sault, apologise or face the consequences. Your choice - choose wisely.
When I set up my website, I promised my family I would not reveal my personal details
How touching, I'm deeply moved. Frankly, I don't give a fuck about you or your family. What I do care about is you and your lies, deception, and trickery. This is the third excuse that you've come out with to avoid having to confirm your identity. First of all, you tried to use the non-existent holocaust denial laws in Britain. Then you tried to convince us that youlike to keep the Zionists guessing. Now you're trying to use your family as protective cover. Quit it Sault, cut the crap. Your excuses are lame.
You have claimed that I am narcissistic, but despite my 'disorder', I do not consider myself to be of any significance to the Zionists. This is why I care not about my photograph being available on the Internet. So tell me Peter, which of us has a problem with narcissism. Which of we two considers ourselves important, and which considers themselves insignificant? Go on Peter, tell me. Tell me how you can make such profound assessments when you have never interacted with me on an interpersonal level outwith e-mail correspondence. Do tell, Dr. Sault, you have my undivided attention. I'm all ears Mr. fucking know-it-all.
But for PlanetClouseau's team, it's par for the course.
Dear oh dear, Doctor Sault PhD. You dissapoint me. Despite being such an eminent psychiatrist, you have to resort recycling Chimp of Zion's old cliche. How unoriginal, how typical. Humour never was your strongest suite.
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.
Peter dear Peter...my oh my. How arrogant, presumptuous, and narcissistic of you to tell me that I have "outstayed my welcome" here on Wake Up From Your Slumber. Here was I thinking that Qrswave was the gaffer here. I must be having those delusions again. I guess it must be my Narcissistic Personality Disorder kicking in. Would you like to me leave, Peter? Tough if you do old chap - I ain't going anywhere. Get used to it. Tsk, tsk Peter you naughty boy. Such petulance! I am physically disabled to a degree, but not "crippled." I am not confined to a wheelchair. I can walk, I can move around the length and breadth of England. Do you catch my drift, Peter? One day you might answer your front door and piss your pants when you see me standing right there in fromt of you, Catch my drift, Peter. I wonder if you would be so mouthy then. I seriously doubt it. "Intellectually crippled", states Dr. Peter Sault. Well, youreminence, for someone who is "intellectually crippled", I'm sure as hell running rings your 'superior' intellect at the moment. Aren't I, Doctor Sault? You can't deal with the issues and challenges that I have put to you, so you resort to making idiotic statements.
Please explain how an intellectual cripple achieves an honours degree. I'm all ears Doctor Sault. You're the head-doctor - you explain. "Emotionally crippled" also, you diagnose. But this diagnosis, like the other two, is way off base. You're the weakling Peter. Who's afraid of the big, bad Zionists, me or you? Which of us is gripped fear, you or I? Your name-calling goes right over my head - water off a duck's back. But when you insult my father's memory, you are fucking with my dark side. I won't warn you again Sault. Don't you ever fucking dare play that lowdown trick on me again. If you do, I swear on my father's grave, I'll hunt you down. Understood Sault? Back off or I'll come after you. You have been warned. You won't be warned again.
As for Kerr's website, it is worth visiting for a laugh now and again, but no one takes it seriously.
Well oh well, Professor Precision is making value judgements. "No one" takes my website seriously, our resident professional researcher states. Evidence please Peter. Show me the empirical model upon which you reach this conclusion. Statistics please Peter. You just LOVE statistics, don't you Doctor Sault. Show me some. Show me the statistical data upon which you have constructed your hypothesis and based your conclusion upon. Explain what sampling techniques you used during your 'research' of my website. Which website are we talking about anyway, PlanetQuo.Com or PlanetQuo.Net?
Tell you what Peter, take a look at this. Yoo hoo, it's me! It would appear that there is quite a bit of interest in PlanetQuo.Net, wouldn't you agree, Peter? There's plenty more where they came from. Wait until the Gooogle spiders have returned to Google HQ with all those search words I posted last week. Peter my good fellow, you might as well post your photograph and be done because by my reckoning, you have around between 7-10 days of a private life left. After that, you're public property. You really shouldn't have posted that silly PlanetQuo Debunked on your website and said all those bad things about Christopher Bollyn. I happen to like to Chris but I fucking well despise you. Publishing that piece was a HUGE mistake on your part - as you will discover on Friday. It's payback time, Peter, Open wide.....there's a good boy.
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
"Zero public interest", you claim. Prove it Peter. Evidence please. Take as long as you like. Peter, old chap, I care not what you think of a website. Your opinions are inconsequential as far as I am concerned. One thing you did manage to get right though, was when you correctly stated that people visit my website for a laugh. Indeed, lots of people are visiting PlanetQuo.Com at the moment, and thet are laughing - loudly. The thing is Peter, it's you and your associates that they're laughing at. Thanks for providing Michael and I with so much material. We are truly grateful. Now go fuck yourself again Sault - the last two obviously didn't take.
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!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Read all about how the Meths man of Mount Lawley connects to the Internet via a non-existent landline. Discover how Junkie boy Linton speaks to Nina on his non-existent phone. Find out how the whip girl