press conference (18-jun) comments - hey guys, good comments. for the record however, i'm not stating that there are or are not links between 9/11 and the federal reserve/IRS/etc.. i'm only suggesting that the Browns' and key supporters question the effectiveness of covering multiple top

Newbie Joined: Jun 25, 2007 Posts: 5

hi all!

I attended the press conference on 18-Jun. I'm not with the media however, just someone who is interested in the IRS, federal reserve, and the situation the Browns' are in.

There's a couple concerns i have about the conference that i'd like to bring up...

There was a reporter standing to the left of the porch (looking from the porch) who was asking questions about the Browns' case and the tax law, or lack thereof. He was partially bald and was wearing a white shirt. Ed jumped on this guy pretty hard at one point. After the conference the reporter was talking to a couple supporters (one was Alfred Liseo) and asking a lot of very intelligent questions. I was standing there listening to them. I think that Ed, and possibly Randy, took the guys questions out of context. He seemed to be very interested in the law and seemed fairly open minded regarding the information he was getting. He also seemed to know his history quite well. Point is, not all media personnel are drones and it's probably not a good idea to burn bridges with those that may be able to help. The guy stayed after the conference was basically over and took the time to continue to ask questions and educate himself. I give him credit for that.

Another issue that troubled me a bit was the diversity of the topics that were touched upon. Randy made a comment about religion an the federal reserve was brought up. Regardless of the validity of the claims, it's hard enough for the people to swallow the tax issue by itself, without having the rest thrown in, especially religion. I think you can see how a lot of people will be turned off by that.

The "Loose Change" video: In my opinion, distributing that video is a mistake. I have well over 500 hrs. of research in 9/11 and in my opinion that video is flawed, to put it mildly. Dylan and the rest of the LC crew may well have the very best intentions, i don't know, be he has his facts wrong. The key question in my mind is whether or not those in power had foreknowledge and i've done enough research to answer 'yes' to that. That makes them just as guilty as if they had perpetrated the event themselves. The rest -- "no planes", faked cell phone calls, bombs, global hawks, insider trading, etc., etc., etc., -- is just unsubstantiated fluff that further divides the community. I used to buy into the same crap myself until i dug deeper. I think that the Loose Change crew backed themselves into a corner with the film; they gathered a lot of what they felt was good evidence to support their claims and now that better evidence is available to blow that to pieces, they're stuck because of the film although, to their credit, they have revised it at least once to fix a couple of the more glaring issues. 9/11 is a topic in it's own right and i'm not sure mixing that with the federal income tax/IRS is going to help win anyone over.

Alfred Liseo -- do you have any contact information for him (email?). Please PM me if you do. I told him i'd help him with a computer issue but i didn't get his email address.

Please give my best to Ed and Elaine. I'm only a couple hours away, so i hope to making the trip again very soon (actually, today, possibly). I'd like to talk to them more.

--BANNED-- by Admins Joined: Jun 19, 2007 Posts: 20

Hey atomMan,

You appear to be a man of intelligence. You defend your research quite well. However, coming in here and saying to any of us that the issues of taxes and 9/11 have no relevance to each other is, well in my opinion, completely ludicrous!

Finish your research! Otherwise, I along with many of other Americans would love to hear your expert opinion on the issue of 2.3 trillion in tax dollars missing and unaccountable within the Pentagon just days prior to 9/11. Certainly your research could not have possibly overlooked these issues. I welcome the idea of being set straight on the facts of two seperate issues, those being taxes and 9/11.

We have all come here to make our stand. If any of us are wrong, then it is our duty to show each other the error of our thinking, that we may correct it.

So with that, I say to you, continue researching. Leave no stone unturned in your quest for the truth. Your very freedom demands it from you. God knows the rest of us are digging as well, even at the risk of our own peril!

Site Admin Joined: Apr 03, 2007 Posts: 580

I agree that things didn't go perfectly at the conference -- they never do go perfectly! But, I got an overall very good feeling from it. I would like to get the WHOLE, UNEDITED, UNCUT video out there for people to see. It could be very useful in averting any more violence upon or near the Browns.

I see your point in separating things, although I would like to remind you that a VERY large percentage of people are now questioning the "official" story of 9/11. I believe it is even the majority that don't buy it -- they have questions. It's very important we get these people on our side.

As far as 9/11 and "prior knowledge," I think you're missing something very important. It wasn't prior knowledge -- just like it was jet fuel that brought down those 3 towers. We are dealing with a false-flag operation -- an attack on our own soil, on our own people, by those claiming to be our government. This is very serious. 9/11 was personally the last straw for me. I abhor anyone in the 9/11 truth movement who can acknowledge that this attack was an "inside job" or "false flag operation" and yet can still say we need to work within the system (lobby congress, vote for Ron Paul, etc etc etc). This is ludicrous!

Now is the time -- not tomorrow, not in a decade. NOW. We've got the numbers. Those mixed messages you're worried about may just do the trick in gathering them to the cause. It may just show them that now is the time.

--BANNED-- by Admins Joined: Jun 19, 2007 Posts: 20

Shaun

Although I very much agree with you that now is the time to stand, it does little good to rush in feet first. No organization on our part, will certainly deal the death blow to our cause. We need plans of action, we need resources within the ranks, and we an intelligence operation that is capable of keeping our ranks well informed on the enemies movement. Without these, as well as any I have more than likely overlooked, we would only find ourselves beating a dead horse. Stratagy is the key to effective resolution/revolution.

We have to think this out very clearly before anyone rushes forward. It requires that we all put our heads together, to become one in mind, body, and spirit. The people of America deserve nothing short of that protection.

Newbie Joined: Jun 25, 2007 Posts: 5

hey guys, good comments. for the record however, i'm not stating that there are or are not links between 9/11 and the federal reserve/IRS/etc.. i'm only suggesting that the Browns' and key supporters question the effectiveness of covering multiple topics when one is hard enough to swallow for the populous, and am doing so as a supporter who wants them to have the best chance at success. i said as much to Ed today (spent most of the day there). Ed responded by basically telling me that he disagreed and his intension was to expose the whole mess, so my point is mute. i don't think it's the wisest decision, but i don't know that i'm right either. i hope he is. as for the majority of people thinking that something is wrong with the official 9/11 story, that doesn't mean they are ready to jump on any of the demolition charges/false-flag/no planes bandwagons. also, the people that disagree with the official 9/11 fairy tale don't necessarily agree with the no income tax people. that's why i thought it best to focus on one issue at a time. you tell people UFO's are real. fine. then you add ghosts and you start losing your audience, even though you may very well be correct. on the other hand, 'ol Ron Paul is covering an awful lot of unpopular bases and he seems very well liked.

Quote:

As far as 9/11 and "prior knowledge," I think you're missing something very important. It wasn't prior knowledge -- just like it was jet fuel that brought down those 3 towers. We are dealing with a false-flag operation -- an attack on our own soil, on our own people, by those claiming to be our government.

let me put "prior knowledge" in the context as i mean it: to me, it no longer matters who did what when. if those in power had prior knowledge, then they are just as guilty as if they had perpetrated the event. believe me, i have a lot of research in this and went through all the motions, from buying the official version, to believing the buildings were demo'd, to the "no planes" theory, to getting down in the dirt and reading long and boring foreign and domestic government documents, reports and testimony. i wound up with as more questions then i had when i started... except one, for which i now have my answer; "they" knew what was coming, where and when. as such, it's no longer as important to me if it was a false flag or not because they are just as guilty either way. they both would have the same result: war in the ME. as for my own opinions, yeah, i believe that demolition charges could've been used and i believe it could well have been a false flag, but i can't prove it with enough certainty to make me happy. Steven Jones can be debunked. So can William Rodriguez and many of the eyewitnesses that heard explosions. nobody has convinced me something other than a plane hit the pentagon. it was only convincing until i found decent evidence that contradicted it, which i couldn't have done without an open mind.

anyway... Elaine had 2 pieces of what i thought was very good news today: 1) Ron Paul allegedly acknowledged the Browns publicly, comparing them to... i forget who, but they were 2 very well known heroes in the history books. i was under the impression this was on his website, but i don't see it. 2) NBC supposedly aired a show this morning, i think, that exposed the Browns in a good light. She said they said something like "the NH motto is live free or die, and that's exactly what a NH couple is doing. they've been asking for 13(?) years to see the law that requires them to pay income tax". that, coming from the main-stream media, really surprised me. anyone see it?