help-gnu-emacs
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Now that the 911 government account is PROVABLY FALSE - Why are the


From: thermate
Subject: Re: Now that the 911 government account is PROVABLY FALSE - Why are the BASTARDS here QUIET ???
Date: 15 Dec 2006 10:23:18 -0800
User-agent: G2/1.0

911 mass murder was an inside job by the Yank and Zionist bastards,
namely halliburton, unocal, exxon oil mafia and the neocons.

911 mass murder was an inside job by the Yank and Zionist bastards,
namely halliburton, unocal, exxon oil mafia and the neocons.

Invasion of Iraq was to control the oil spigot.

Invasion of Iraq was to control the oil spigot.

Invasion of Afghanistan and blame for 911 on OBL was to stop democracy
in Saudi Arabia.

Invasion of Afghanistan and blame for 911 on OBL was to stop democracy
in Saudi Arabia.

"Without trade with China, since the 1990s the United States economy
would never have experienced long-term inflation-free growth
unprecedented in its history."

"Without trade with China, since the 1990s the United States economy
would never have experienced long-term inflation-free growth
unprecedented in its history."

US-China meeting ends without yuan agreement
Jane Macartney, Beijing

China and the United States have agreed on ways to tackle global
economic imbalances, but their financial chiefs came away from two days
of talks seemingly as far apart as ever on their core dispute over the
strength of China's currency.

*
Their inaugural "strategic economic dialogue", intended to ensure that
China's ascent as a major trading power was mutually beneficial and
did not end in trade protectionism and political recriminations, ended
as expected with more style than substance.

Hank Paulson, the US Treasury Secretary, needed to balance the ire of
American politicians, who say that an undervalued Chinese yuan gives
Chinese exporters an unfair advantage against realistic expectations of
Beijing's willingness to give ground.

The soaring US trade deficits have their counterpart in Chinese
surpluses racked up by exporting to American consumers. Some claim that
an undervalued Chinese yuan allows Chinese products to be priced so low
that American companies cannot compete.

Mr Paulson spoke after China agreed to let the New York Stock Exchange
and Nasdaq open offices in Beijing, while Washington gave the green
light for China to join the Inter-American Development Bank.

He said: "China's currency policy is a core issue in our economic
relationship. We have indicated to the Chinese in the clearest possible
terms that more flexibility in their exchange rate will help China
achieve more balanced economic growth and have more control over its
own monetary policy."

While Mr Paulson aims to lay a foundation to tackle a complex set of
issues in the long term, he is under pressure to deliver progress in
the form of a faster rise in the yuan -- a litmus test for many of
China's commitment to market reforms.

Both sides agreed that differences persisted, particularly about
whether Beijing could speed up the pace of reform. Mr Paulson said: "We
have a point of view that there's more risk in going too slowly than
there is in going too fast, and the Chinese see that differently."

But China, now the fourth-largest economy and fully aware of its
growing international clout, was not prepared to sit back and be
lectured by visiting Americans.

Wu Yi, the Vice-Premier and leader of the Chinese delegation, took her
second opportunity in two days to question what she called the limited
knowledge among Americans of China's campaign to give market forces
greater sway over the economy.

It was no coincidence that the People's Daily, the official newspaper
of the ruling Communist Party, said that the US had China to thank for
a long period of low inflation. It said in a commentary: "Without trade
with China, since the 1990s the United States economy would never have
experienced long-term inflation-free growth unprecedented in its
history."
address@hidden wrote:
> 911 government account is now PROVABLY FALSE - Why are the BASTARDS
> QUIET ?
>
> We know, the mass murder was done by YANK and ZIONIST Bastards
> together, and blamed on OBL to invade Afghanistan and Iraq. Now, they
> are back to square 1, on China's Back after Hainan, to increase the
> currency value. Did anyone see those desperate pictures of Bush in
> INDIA, sucking up to Manmohan Singh? Leaning extra six inches in the
> photos towards Manmohan to FLATTER the Indian people. Certainly, there
> is some BOOT-STRAPPING of Indian Image and economy to scare China after
> having exploited their country for decades as a vast SLAVE LABOR camp
> and then blaming them for running it !!! Remember, how Bush was unhappy
> at the Death of Kalpana Chawala, cherry picked to create the MYTH of
> US-India friendship? But the shuttle blew up - a divine act against the
> ANTI-CHRIST. Now they have cherry picked another Indian girl. Yet
> others are some Zionist Neocon advisors helping specific Indian
> industries to make image making rise, eg Mettal. The idea is to
> purposely sabotage China's global rise and steady progress. The Bush
> and Neocon principle of politics is by deception, spying, scaring and
> myth-making. It has been very successful in the PAST. The creation of
> Israel on the land of Palestine was thru the false myth as the Rabbi's
> of Neturei Karta have explained to us. The free book on the internet,
> Min Ha Mitzer, From the Depths or "Holocaust Victims Accuse" [the
> zionists] is available as a pdf for download. Its written wy Rabbi
> Wasserman who was himself in the Aushwitz. Similarly, 911 was a fake
> myth.Its best described in the words of Philosophy Professor James
> Fetzer.
>
> footnote: Bush's pretense of RELOGISITY is a MYTH. He screwed numerous
> girls in his drinking years.
>
> www.st911.org
>
> he Science of 9/11: What's Controversial, What's Not
>
> Propaganda by the government and the corporate media would have us
> believe that the 9/11 "inside job" hypothesis is not merely
> controversial but unsupported by proof. That is wrong. Academics,
> experts, and scholars who have examined the physical evidence and
> considered this event within its historical context tend to converge in
> agreement that the inside-job hypothesis is, in fact, strongly
> supported by the available evidence, while the version advanced in The
> 9/11 Commission Report is not only false but provably false and in
> crucial respects physically impossible. That the official account of
> 9/11 is a lie and that 9/11 appears to have been an inside job is no
> longer a matter of serious scientific debate.
>
> Even though the broad outlines of what happened are no longer
> controversial--for example, we know that The World Trade Center was
> intentionally demolished by a high-energy causal process physically
> unrelated to plane crashes and resulting fires--the precise details of
> how the perpetrators carried out the attack remains the subject of
> intense controversy. From a political point of view, this controversy
> may be insignificant. What we know with relative certainty about 9/11
> is already the story of the century: it demands re-thinking our
> history, our politics, perhaps even our way of life. But from a
> scientific rather than political standpoint, controversial questions
> about what may have happened on 9/11 are fascinating and
> challenging--not least of all because they could lead to a better
> understanding of 9/11 with respect to its social and political
> significance.
>
> In an attempt to clarify these matters, Scholars for 9/11 Truth will be
> hosting a conference entitled "The Science of 9/11: What's
> Controversial, What's Not", to be held in mid- to late-July in Madison,
> WI. I think we can all agree that the most important dimension of our
> efforts is explaining why the "official account" that the government
> has advanced cannot be sustained. Since there can be disagreements even
> here about what we should or should not emphasize and what has or has
> not been proven to an extent that is sufficient to emphasize them as
> "refutations" of the government's account, I am inviting Barrie Zwicker
> to organize the opening session, a panel discussion on "disproofs" of
> the government's account.
>
> Following the opening session, there will be a keynote speaker and five
> major sessions devoted to the issues that have tended to divide us. As
> the program chair, I am inviting Steve Jones to organize a panel
> discussion of the use of conventional means for destroying the Twin
> Towers. [Editor's note: I regret to report that Steve Jones has
> declined.] I am inviting Judy Wood to organize a panel discussion on
> non-conventional means, including high-tech directed energy weaponry,
> that might have been used to destroy the World Trade Center. I am
> inviting Morgan Reynolds to organize a panel on planes/no planes at the
> WTC and George Nelson on the Pentagon and Shanksville. Each of these
> sessions would be of 2 1/2 to 3 hours duration. I anticipate there will
> be a registration fee of $100 for the week-end long conference, which
> will include a keynote address on Saturday evening.
>
> While the program is at its tentative and preliminary stage, I am open
> to suggestions for possible participants and additional topics. There
> may be changes in the individuals responsible for some of these panels,
> but my expectation would be that their focus will remain the same.
> Anyone who has ideas they would like to share with me is welcome to
> forward them to me at address@hidden at their earliest convenience.
> This conference should provide an opportunity for experts on complex
> and technical scientific questions to explain their research and its
> significance. My hope is that by "agreeing to disagree," and by
> subjecting each others' research to rigorous but collegial criticism,
> the attention-getting controversial aspects of 9/11 research may be
> turned into a benefit, rather than a distraction, in the larger process
> of seeking and exposing the truth about 9/11.
> 
> 
> James H. Fetzer
> Founder
> Scholars for 9/11 Truth



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]