You may have heard all kinds of things about me or just heard of the award they named after me at the JREF forum.
Let me explain my story, I started to question what we had been told about 9/11. I had heard about Norman Mineta's testimony and how it was ignored, I also read an excellent book by David Ray Griffin that spoke of an interview Dick Cheney gave just 5 days after the attacks.
So I had a look online and read the whole interview.
(NBC Meet The Press with Tim Russert - Dick Cheney -16th Sept 2001)
I was a little gob smack at what Dick Cheney actually claims in this interview of what he claims happened on the morning of 9/11 which is in direct contradiction to what the 9/11 commission claims when he arrived at the PEOC.
Dick Cheney himself claims that he was in the PEOC when he hears of the pentagon attack, so therefore it is a possibility that he was there before 9:37 at the time of the Pentagon attack as Norman Mineta claims. Bush was in the school reading with the kids when this all kicked off, so we know he was not around to make any decisions but Cheney was alright!
Now the question which I have asked over and over again is did Dick Cheney arrive at the PEOC at 9:58am as the commission claims or before 9:37 as he claims in his 1st interview?
And when you put this into context with others statements and testimonies with others who were at their and in contact with the White House (in particularly Norman Mineta who over hears a young man giving Cheney a countdown in distance of an object heading towards them when they hear of the Pentagon attack) it paints a very different picture as to what Dick Cheney will later claim in interviews after this 1st interview and what the 9/11 commission finally claims.
Especially when you consider the evidence to support the commissions claims isn't based on verifiable evidence like alarm data that is not retrievable.
After this 1st interview given just 5 days after the attacks, Dick Cheney changed his story which the commission used but others who were there still contradict his altered story and what the commission eventually claims.
So I joined the JREF Forum and I was told that Norman Minetas testimony was debunked and given a link to a another thread, I read through it and there was nothing other than repeating the commission claims, even though most of it based on evidence which can't be verified. It was just people falsely claiming Mineta was wrong and providing no evidence to support this. What was happening was a psychological meltdown! lol
A poster called Gravy who I didn't know would this was Mr 9/11 New Yorker "Mark Roberts", was preaching the loudest that Mineta was wrong but he and the rest of his follower were losing badly because he was just projecting his personal beliefs which aren't based on reality, just what he wants to be true.
In what I can only describe as an attempt to win Randi's millions by using some sort of psychic powers, forum members could tell I was a sock of another poster even though I had never heard of this other poster or knew what a sock was? This was enough to action the mods into banning me.
I sent them emails over the next few days as I was not aware of breaking any of the forums rules or agreements and I wanted to continue spanking the pseudo skeptics including Gravy who I had already exposed as a liar on another thread but I never received any replies.
And I didn't even get to point out the Dick Cheney Interview which confirms he is in the PEOC with Mineta when they hear of the Pentagon attack, before the commission claims.
Or even point out what else this evidence reveals as a possibility.
Anyway, I joined another forum called the Screw Loose Change (SLC) and the issue surrounding my banning at the JREF Forum came up, at the time I didn't know why I was banned, so one of the SLC members went across to the JREF Forum and explained that the Mods thought I was a sock puppet of this other poster.
So I continued posting at the SLC forum not realising it was a hang out for JREFs most useless debunkers and they would pop across and even had JREF members join the SLC forum to debunk my theory. After their continuous failings and laughing at the cognitive dissonance, I used to put my favourite quotes in my signature until I had too many quotes to fit in my signature. After incorrectly using the wrong word in a sentence, members of the JREF forum decided to create the Stundie Awards. The awards were revenge for me criticising and challenging their personal belief in the official story.
I then complained to James Randi himself about my unfair banning based on false allegations and the subsequent Stundie Awards, he passed this on with the promise it would be resolved. However to reverse my banning, I would have to prove to them who I am, in order to prove I am not this other poster.
Talk about proving a negative, besides I'm not in the habit of passing over my personal details to a forum who I do not know and more importantly, why should I have to provide evidence when they can't provide evidence as to why they thought I was this other poster in the first place? lol
This allows them to keep their precious Stundie Awards which I was concerned about at first but soon realised the awards are nothing more than a bukkake session for the groupthinkers who regularly laugh and post quotes.
Since then, I post on other forums about the possibility of 9/11 being an inside job and my theory regarding a coverup by either the commission or Cheney himself as yet to be debunked.
I do not believe in ghosts, paranormal activity, psychics but I understand that they are my personal beliefs and as a skeptic, I have to accept there is a possibility I could be wrong. I'm not what you would consider a conspiracy theorist as I do not have any interest in the whole NWO or Illuminate stuff. I'm often labelled a truther although this couldn't be further from the truth unless anyone who disagrees with the official story is therefore a truther! I've never joined a single truth group and just because I post at the Loose Change forum, doesn't make me one either because I join debunker forums long before I joined any truther forums.
I support a new investigation into the events surrounding 9/11 as it is clear that the commission was inadequate, even some of the commissioners themselves say as much.
I enjoy debate and discussion and I'm looking forward to what this forum might have to offer. I am very respectful to anyone who shows the same respect back. If debunkers want to debate the facts, I am more than willing to have a discussion with them, but if they want trade names, that is fine too..both will be dealt with. I'm quite good at offending people when faced with such closed mindedness which some people have foolishly mistaken for debunking and critical thinking.
Sorry for the long intro and I hope I ain't bored you all into a coma. lol
Cheers
Stundie
