You're insecurity is really starting to become obverse here UncleSpook.

I've never made such claims and to my knowledge neither has Chico, you on the other hand have made this claim countless times!


So your "provable proven" information/evidence is in fact just your opinion about the validity of their sincerity!

You really expose yourself here, Zook, very much like the Emperor with his new clothes. You clearly did not follow the link in this post of mine, which leads to other links with the aforementioned red flags. Truth-seeking really is not your forte.


There are no "facts", there's only propaganda. You really don't listen.

You mean, goose-chasing is not my forte. I plead guilty.



There are no "facts" about 9/11/2001?? <---------- Chico's claim.

Mewonders if he ever took elemental physics or is familiar with the basic kinematic equations or the laws of conservation of angular momentum? Those are hard physics facts pertaining to mass and motion. Let's see Fisk and Pilger navigate those facts. We already know you are prevaricating here, at least those of us with working
thought processes. If you insist on hanging yourself, Chico, let me provide the rope and oak tree.

Pax Postcard From India

Are you saying that reading information about Dr. Laibow's husbands old job of heading the US Army's psyops operations, as "goose-chasing"?


UncleSpook what I find amazing is your ability to derail a topic, even your own!

There's already a topic for the discussion of 911 here, just because the video you used in your opening post has since been proved to be full of lies and is most probably an example of US military "Psyops", doesn't justify your attempts at trying to distract away from those facts!

"Let's see Fisk and Pilger navigate those facts", why???

You made the accusations against them, surely the burden of proof lays with you here!

Come on UncleSpook! can't you see what a great opportunity this would be to salvage your credibility, post the proof on them!



p.s. Still patiently waiting to see that evidence against Chavez you claimed to have!

All you can do is fall back to the childish taunt, "I know you are, but what am I?" You're out of ammo.


I majored in chemistry at college. My minor was physics. I am well aware of the evidence for 9/11. I am also aware that ALL of that evidence was delivered to me via the media, which is chock full of propaganda. My college education and everything I learned about physics was also delivered by a programmed educational system chock full of propaganda. Like you, I'm living in a Matrix. You think that's a fact your holding? Hmm.

The link you provided that excoriates Laibow (and Stubblebine) points to a Dr. Rath Health Foundation ... with a banner and caption about receiving an award from the Auschwitz Survivors association.

The Auschwitz story is highly suspect. Not that an internment camp wasn't there, but did you know that there were two Auschwitz plaques that tell different stories about the number that perished there (with a delta in the number of deaths in the many hundreds of thousands)? Both plaques were sanctioned by the Simon Wiesenthal Center. Have you ever researched this center and its key role wrt the Holocaust story and as Norman Finkelstein correctly states, the Holocaust Industry? Perhaps you should. Then you will begin to understand that this foundation guy Rath is likely a Zionist operative spreading disinfo about Laibow and Stubblebine.

How's that for discernment?





Direct evidence can be obtained by using the free fall times offered up by the establishment itself and comparing them with those expected for a fall from the reference height (e.g. on the tower). Can also be obtained by visual comparison of a falling point on the tower (in any of teh mainstream videos put out) and using a stopwatch. You can't use the nebulous "programmed educational system chockful of propaganda" shibboleth to explain everything beneath the deep baby blue, Chico. Mind you, shills can, but not truthseekers.

Pax Postcard From India

Constructing arguments based on degrees of separation is like throwing your gun when you run out of ammunition. You're basically done.


I don't, but it's clear you missed the point about questioning everything you receive in the Matrix.


Let's talk some about India! I'm really curious to hear of your impressions. Could you maybe start a thread and share with us some of your experiences? I would like to learn more about India as seen through your eyes. Did you find any mosquito netting?

http://www4.dr-rath-foundation.org/THE_ ... ction.html

I did some research on the Rath Foundation ... which attacks Laibow and Stubblebine ... and to tell you the truth, I kinda like the guy - after a brief perusal of his website.

My question is who to trust? Dr, Laibow, who gives more or less a good assessment of Codex Alimentarius? Or her detractors at the Rath Health Foundation, who apppear to say the right things about the state of affairs including the corporate criminality of Big Pharma (and its abuses via Codex Alimentarius) and the general criminality of currency speculator George Soros, etc.

Why are two efforts to expose the power pyramid vectored against each other? Laibow attacks Codex Alimentarius en toto (which is my position as well) ... whereas the Rath Health Foundation attacks what it refers to as the abuses of Codex Alimentarius (which means it generally supports CA, but recognizes the abuses of CA by Big Pharma).

My discernment favors Laibow's perspective because the Rath Foundation fails to recognize the import of CA, namely, that it was designed for abuse and its abuse then is a matter of inevitability. To wit, Rath still believes in the system and our ability to change it from within ... whereas the evidence points to a failed system and the need for revolutionary change of mind and/or body.

Pax Postcard From India

ps: I'm no lonegr convinced that Rath is a Zionist operative, tho' I will not entirely exclude that possibility. After all, the Zionists perfected the science of the false flag. Just because he was a friend of Linus Pauling doesn't necessarily mean he gets a free pass in my books. (I like Pauling).

If you are serious about questioning everything, dismissing nothing, and taking a position of uncertainty, the answer is that you trust dynamically, never trusting anyone completely, nor distrusting anyone completely. Use a sliding scale, and avoid the extremes.


Binary thinking results in this kind of apparent contradiction. Instead of seeing everything in black or white, try shades of gray. Codex Alimentarius, like Agenda 21, is not bad "en toto". Like communism, socialism, and democracy, it was an attempt at fairness that has been corrupted by sociopaths.


Good! Shades of gray. Uncertainty. Question everything, dismiss nothing. I'm pleased to see this potential change in you starting to develop.

Which, of course, is an implicit part of my determinations. You often only see the states of my arguments, not the paths that arrive them. But in your haste to judge, Chico, you often confuse the states with the paths.

In the specific case of Laibow vs Rath, I have found some complexity. We can address that complexity ... or meander off into general principles of simplicity and complexity. I have a hunch you prefer the latter pursuit.



Again, you assume that I have not studied the shades of grey in any degree. Then again, you almost have to assume this in lieu of a lack of convincing counterpoint. Like communism, socialism, capitalism, etc. ... CA is entirely bad. En toto. It represents the centralization of authority over food resources. From innocence and decentralized origins, to the inevitability of design implementation and centralization, such be the evolution of totalitarian systems.

To wit, the food resource should never be allowed within reach of centralizing design. Its control should be kept in local hands, to be then exchanged with the global environment (through trade).




No change for me. But hopefully your perceptions of my arguments have come out of the dark clouds in your heads.

Pax Postcard From India