(continuedfrom16Feb10)

Pericles wrote, "I'm sure Afghani women are profoundly grateful, on a daily basis."

Clearly Pericles has not bothered to inform himself of what is actually going on in Afghanistan, not even taking the trouble to have read the article he is ostensibly commenting on (or, indeed, it would seem the post he is comment is supposed to be in response to). This is what Kellie Tranter wrote:

"Has Mr Rudd spoken to any representatives from the Revolutionary Association of the Women Afghanistan (http://www.rawa.org/index.php), the oldest political and social organisation of Afghan women that has been struggling for peace, freedom, democracy and women's rights in fundamentalism-blighted Afghanistan since 1977? Is he aware of their outrage about President Karzai backing a law governing Shia family relations that effectively legalised marital rape (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article6098614.ece) and allowed for women to effectively be imprisoned in their homes? Or of that organisation's claims that the UN is concerned that the number of violent incidents against women had risen to their highest level since the fall of the Taliban? Or of their calls (http://www.rawa.org/rawa/2009/05/06/interview-with-the-revolutionary-association-of-the-women-of-afghanistan.html) for coalition forces to withdraw their troops?"

Clearly one group of women are not as "profoundly grateful, on a daily basis" as Pericles would have us think they are.

---

Like the model citizen of the New World Order that he is, Pericles unquestioningly accepts all that he is told by established authority:

"The masterstroke here is of course is the way you allocate policy equivalency between a lone, would-be suicide bomber with exploding underpants, and 9/11, Iraq, and the US invasion of Afghanistan."

A lone, would-be suicide bomber, Pericles?

Have you bothered to read what Kurt Haskell, (http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/index.ssf/2009/12/flight_253_passenger_kurt_hask.html), one of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab's intended victims, had to say about this:

"Today is the second worst day of my life after 12-25-09. Today is the day that I realized that my own country is lying to me and all of my fellow Americans. Let me explain. ..."

Space does not permit me to properly continue, but how about properly informing yourself on these issues, rather than further cluttering these forums with ill-informed rants?

I can guarantee one thing, daggett.

>>Like the model citizen of the New World Order that he is, Pericles unquestioningly accepts all that he is told by established authority<<

I can absolutely 100% guarantee that I question "established authority" infinitely more than you question your dopey conspiracy theories. You are an absolute sucker for any story that's doing the rounds, aren't you. The wackier the better, you'll swallow it.

I consider that I have been exceptionally patient in the face of your ludicrous attempts to cross-question me about stories that only a dedicated conspiracy-nut would even give house-room. You are tedious, tendentious, completely boring, and on an entirely differently-abled logical planet.

And shrill.

Did I mention shrill?

That's probably the most annoying aspect. Your posts are the modern-day equivalent of having to listen to a Maggie Thatcher speech, circa 1980, while dragging one's fingernails down a wall and poking a pencil into one's eye.

Repeatedly.

Have a great day.

"Never argue with a fool,onlookers may not be able to tell the difference." With this perception Pericles, you should be good at soliloquy and a mirror as a prop.

You fail constantly to address facts and realities.Hamid Kazai the puppet leader of Afghanistan used to work for UNOCAL the very same company involved in getting the oil pipeline from Turkmenistan to the Capasian Sea.It needs to go through both Afghanistan and Pakistan.Now which country has now invaded these countries?

How about a bet Pericles? If you can disprove the physics of Building 7 of the WTC coming down at freefall gravity with no resistance of the lower structures was due to fire,and the paper on nano-thermite by Prof Niels Harrit which shows the use of extensive explosives,I will pay you $10,000.00.If you lose you then pay Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth the same amount.

Now you have the resources of the US Govt at your disposal who will gladly assist.Email NIST.National Institute for Standards and Technology.They are the body reponsible for such reports.

So put your money where your mouth is.

OK, let's explore this a little.

>>How about a bet Pericles? If you can disprove the physics of Building 7 of the WTC coming down at freefall gravity with no resistance of the lower structures was due to fire,and the paper on nano-thermite by Prof Niels Harrit which shows the use of extensive explosives,I will pay you $10,000.00.If you lose you then pay Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth the same amount.<<

What would you accept as "disproof", Arjay? Who would decide whether explosives were or were not used to bring down the building?

Be specific. There could be ten grand at stake here.

You see, my problem with the bet as it stands is that you haven't been able in the past to accept the obvious stupidity of the nano-thermite proposition, and the utter impossibility of framing a scenario in which it would occur.

All appeals to common sense have been dismissed, accompanied by snide references to anyone disagreeing with your fantasy being a "model citizen of the New World Order".

At least, I assume that is supposed to be an insult.

The very fact that you appear to give credibility to Niels Harrit leads to the obvious conclusion that whatever "disproof" is presented to you, your devotion to his wacky theory will disallow. Even the journal in which it was published disowned it, as it was not properly presented or peer reviewed.

So before taking the bet (I'll send my ten grand to Haiti, by the way) it would be useful to understand who actually decides the merits of any arguments put forward.

Generally speaking, I'm with Ron Mossad on this, by the way.

http://ronmossad.blogspot.com/2009/04/final-word-on-niels-harrit-nanothermite.html

Tell you what. Let's ask him to decide.

Pericles,

Concerning Arjay's bet, why not begin by explaining how fire alone randomly burning through WTC 7 could have caused all the structural strength within the first 8 floors of WTC 7 to fail uniformly within the first 2.25 seconds of 'collapse' (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSyqfM-Rgy0). Please identify which structural components failed on each of the 8 floors and when and how the fire alone caused all of those components to fail simultaneously, floor by floor within the first 2.25 seconds.

If you truly care as much for the victims of the Haitian earthquake as you claim, and if you are as right as you insist you are, then I am sure that none of this would present you with any difficulty.

---

Pericles seems to have a remarkably thin skin. His contributions on this and other forums (e.g. http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=3330#81995) consists of almost nothing but personal attacks principally against me, but he is apparently offended, when I describe him as a "model citizen of the New World Order".

So, Pericles, if you are not as uncritical of what is told to you by established authority as I had said you were, when did you arrive at the firm conviction that 9/11 was the work of Islamist extremists? It wouldn't happen to have been at the time on 11 September 2001 itself (or 12 September on this side of the International Date Line) that the Bush administration pronounced Al Qaeda to be perpetrators?

If you did not uncritically accept what he said immediately, please explain the thought processes that led you to accept that Bush (who told us all of Iraqi WMD's in 2002 and stole the Presidential elections won by Al Gore in 2000) was telling the truth and to firmly hold onto that conviction since then?

For my part, I don't readily accept all conspiracy theories as you should well know. If you had ever bothered to read my posts, you would know that it was not until late 2007 that I seriously entertained the possibility that 9/11 was the work of the Bush administration itself. I challenge you to ... (tobecontinued)

(continuedfromabove) ... find one thing I have ever written anywhere on the 'Net before September 2008 in which questions the Official account of 9/11.

September 2008 is seven years after 9/11, so I would suggest that it is hardly typical of the person who immediately accepts any conspiracy theory that you keep so dishonestly attempting to depict me as.

So how about focusing on the issues we are discussing from now on instead of personal attacks?