Michael
Michael,
First, I want to thank you for providing a great site and for all of the hard work that you've put in and all the sacrifices you've made to do so.
I guess I had never completely read the rules about calling people out as I have seen numerous posts to that effect. I apologize to you for breaking those rules if that is the case. As for my apologies to the others, no can do. What kind of a freedom fighter would I be if I don't stick to my own words and was forced to change?
As a side note, I don't ever remember suggesting that I was smarter than the rest or some "super sleuth" to root out evil here. I don't recall attacking you in any manner.
I will ban myself, but if you feel the need to do so also, so be it. I have spent so much time trying to convince others of what is truly going on in this world, with most just wanting to bury their heads, my frustration level is not healthy. I need a long break from this whole thing. I have no kids, no grand kids and no younger family to be concerned about the very troubling changes that are both here and coming to this country and world. I have spent thousands and thousands of dollars of time and money simply because I believe in doing the right thing.......money and time that I did not have.
I went to a store that I frequent yesterday, and was always wondering why the owner, who liked Ron Paul, was against his war policies. He is usually the nicest guy in the world, and so when I asked him, I got someone screaming at the top of their lungs for twenty minutes, cursing this country for not finishing the "jobs" that they start and that we have an obligation to be the policemen of the world. And that everyone against war were a bunch of drugged out idiots. Unfortunately, so many are brainwashed by the media that I see no hope for them. People have a right to their opinion, but when murdering young and old becomes acceptable because a country wants to "help" another, it is a very sad world.
I am not opposed to different opinions whatsoever. I never said that the posters were putting up incorrect information, just that is was being done in an apparent attempt to discredit Ron by only telling partial truths and refusing to comment when someone brings up a valid point; only to move on to another post. They could have just as easily told everyone how Ron likes chocolate chip cookies, but that won't add shock value.
I wish you all the best in your endeavours. it's time for me to focus on making money again.
Bob
Thank you for your letter.
You are welcome here.
There is no need to back down. You, as everyone, are entitled to your opinions and to express them. We are all free to argue and debate the opinions that that we hold. All I ask, is that we try to keep to the standards that Dr. Paul has set for us. He is my teacher and mentor, and I do my best to "spread the message" the best I can, in the ways that I can.
One of the things I have learned through observation, is that he never attacks another individual. He talks about philosophical differences, but he always assumes the best in people.
That is all I was trying to say with my post.
I want to thank you for your support, and your dedication to the campaign. It was you, and everyone like you - including people you don't agree with - that made the campaign what it is.
None of us are perfect, least of all me. As someone pointed out below - no one follows the posting rules completely. This is true, and I am sorry to make an example of you. I don't have the time nor the desire to play mother hen or police man and keep everyone in line. I'm sorry to pick on you. It truly isn't fair.
I do want everyone to be free, and to feel free to express themselves here.
I think this is a great site also because of people like you. We are all in this boat together. We all see the puzzle from a different angle. We can all contribute and learn from one another.
This is all I wanted to say.
People can put up incorrect information about Ron - that is part of the price of freedom. But that is our opportunity to correct it, and to clarify it. If one person honestly believes something that is wrong, it is up to us to honestly help them see our perspective.
Thank you, Bob. I understand your need to make money, but you are always welcome here.
Michael
And that is why he lost
"One of the things I have learned through observation, is that he never attacks another individual. He talks about philosophical differences, but he always assumes the best in people."
I think this was a key element in Ron Paul, frankly, bombing in several of the debates.
I watched each and every one of them, and I was outright furious at him, as were some of my friends watching as well, for not going after McCain and Rudy and their blatant, statist lies more forcefully. "The only thing necessary for evil to succeed is for men of good conscience to do nothing", and effectively that is what Ron did in the debates, more often than not --- nothing. He rightfully and legitimately SHOULD have attacked McCain, Rudy and the others more, much more than he did, and his wishy-washy verbal wrist-slapping of them left me so disappointed.
Well, it's all water over the dam now, but I hope some of us learned something from it: When confronting evil, CONFRONT it!
That's an interesting point
I agree with your analysis.
ps. Bob W, that's great how that grocery store owner started screaming--just shows how much his position is based on emotions.
Fellow freedom fighter
We can all understand your frustration. Don't let it get the best of you. You can focus on making money and still take time to drop in here when you are able. What we are all trying to accomplish is more important than money. If it all continues as it is it won't be worth anything anyway.
THANKS BOB
THANKs for your MICHAEL, posted my sentiments also. GREAT forum .
TLF
Not one single person (aside
Not one single person (aside from Michael himself) conforms to the posted guidelines of the Forum. If someone else scolded you for doing so, and it wasn't Nystrom, that person was a hypocrite.
Just food for thought...I've enjoyed some of your posts.
SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States
SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States
Bob I can understand your outlook entirely
The point Micheal Nystrom made was one of attacking another because of the difference in views which are completely apparent as to why those views are the way they are but that is just it.. All are welcomed here.. But like you have stated above, I myself will also state... I will not back down nor give quarter.
Find out if you have a local militia - http://www.uaff.us/
Real Patriots for 9/11 truth -- http://patriotsquestion911.com/
Wealth = speech ... I hope you achieve your goals.
A bit of advice ...
1. The most important skill to learn in life is the skill of listening.
2. Humility attracts people, pride turns people away.
I wish you well.
WAHOR!!
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/48994
WAHOR!!
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/48994
Does exploding
Styrofoam bring down their buildings? You're right pride does turn people away rhino..
Find out if you have a local militia - http://www.uaff.us/
Real Patriots for 9/11 truth -- http://patriotsquestion911.com/
Instead of personal four letter attacks ...
you now have decided to lie about my positions.
Not sure which is worse.
I will say that humility is a weakness of mine as well.
WAHOR!!
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/48994
WAHOR!!
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/48994
oh no
that was all yours.... be proud of it. No need to bastardize your own thoughts.. That would be hypocritical of you.
Find out if you have a local militia - http://www.uaff.us/
Real Patriots for 9/11 truth -- http://patriotsquestion911.com/
Devon brought up light weight concrete ...
I merely asked if he was familiar with what some light weight concrete was made of and if the aggregate was substituted with styrofoam there is a possibility that it could explode when exposed to sufficient heat.
Not sure how you can say that I think that the slab floors of the towers did in fact explode. I even prefaced the whole arguement by clearly stating that I don't think the lightweight concrete in the towers had styrofoam in it.
You are either a liar, partially illiterate, or just dumb.
I know that this last sentence could be read as a personal attack and I am sorry for that, but I can't figure you out so I have placed you in one of those three catagories in my own mind.
WAHOR!!
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/48994
WAHOR!!
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/48994
He also brought up inertia.
Which you danced around like a witchdoctor dancing around a fire... You brought up Styrofoam to explain exploding concrete.. Devon would never be so naive as to approach that possibility. He just was asking what caused it to explode instead of crumble.
Hey you can attack all you want, I have helped many people figure you out..
No need for me to categorize you in my mind.. You have taken care of that for me and many others already. I am just here to remind you..
WAHOT.
Find out if you have a local militia - http://www.uaff.us/
Real Patriots for 9/11 truth -- http://patriotsquestion911.com/
In case you are interested.
You can view yourself.
http://forums.libertylove.org/?q=node/708
Find out if you have a local militia - http://www.uaff.us/
Real Patriots for 9/11 truth -- http://patriotsquestion911.com/
Once again, the chonology of posts ...
Devon:
We'll go with the official story... they assumed that the entire 3,500 gallons of jet fuel was confined to just one floor of the World Trade Center, that the jet fuel burnt with perfect efficency, that no hot gases left this floor, that no heat escaped this floor by conduction and that the steel and concrete had an unlimited amount of time to absorb all the heat.
Now each of the towers contained 96,000 (short) tons of steel. That is an average of 96,000/117 = 820 tons per floor. Lets suppose that the bottom floors contained roughly twice the amount of steel of the upper floors (since the lower floors had to carry more weight). So let's estimate that the lower floors contained about 1,100 tons of steel and the upper floors about 550 tons = 550 x 907.2 ≈ 500,000 kgs. We will assume that the floors hit by the aircraft contained the lower estimate of 500,000 kgs of steel. This generously underestimates the quantity of steel in these floors, and once again leads to a higher estimate of the maximum temperature.
Each story had a floor slab and a ceiling slab. These slabs were 207 feet wide, 207 feet deep and 4 (in parts 5) inches thick and were constructed from lightweight concrete. So each slab contained 207 x 207 x 1/3 = 14,283 cubic feet of concrete. Now a cubic foot of lightweight concrete weighs about 50kg, hence each slab weighed 714,150 ≈ 700,000 kgs. Together, the floor and ceiling slabs weighed some 1,400,000 kgs.
We still on the same page?
I inquired about lightweight concrete and added that decades ago they used to substitute styrofoam for aggregate to make light wieght concrete. Anyways this was touched on in several posts, but here is an important one from me:
Rhino:
If styrofoam was used as the aggregate substitute, there would be small pockets everywhere. When the polymer reaches a certain temperature, it could explode. Not saying it did, but this is a plausible scenerio.
One day later on 7/16 I posted the following:
Almost forgot, I wanted to hash out the concrete question also.
Personally, I think that there is a high probability that there was no styrofoam in the concrete, but has anybody proven this?
WAHOR!!
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/48994
WAHOR!!
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/48994
I am sorry for calling you a liar ...
I now know that you are either partially illiterate or dumb.
Go back and read it.
Devon brought up light weight concrete.
WAHOR!!
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/48994
WAHOR!!
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/48994
This is Devon’s intro to the building structure:
We'll go with the official story... they assumed that the entire 3,500 gallons of jet fuel was confined to just one floor of the World Trade Center, that the jet fuel burnt with perfect efficency, that no hot gases left this floor, that no heat escaped this floor by conduction and that the steel and concrete had an unlimited amount of time to absorb all the heat.
Now each of the towers contained 96,000 (short) tons of steel. That is an average of 96,000/117 = 820 tons per floor. Lets suppose that the bottom floors contained roughly twice the amount of steel of the upper floors (since the lower floors had to carry more weight). So let's estimate that the lower floors contained about 1,100 tons of steel and the upper floors about 550 tons = 550 x 907.2 ≈ 500,000 kgs. We will assume that the floors hit by the aircraft contained the lower estimate of 500,000 kgs of steel. This generously underestimates the quantity of steel in these floors, and once again leads to a higher estimate of the maximum temperature.
Each story had a floor slab and a ceiling slab. These slabs were 207 feet wide, 207 feet deep and 4 (in parts 5) inches thick and were constructed from lightweight concrete. So each slab contained 207 x 207 x 1/3 = 14,283 cubic feet of concrete. Now a cubic foot of lightweight concrete weighs about 50kg, hence each slab weighed 714,150 ≈ 700,000 kgs. Together, the floor and ceiling slabs weighed some 1,400,000 kgs.
We still on the same page?
I inquired about lightweight concrete and added that decades ago they used to substitute styrofoam for aggregate to make light wieght concrete. Anyways this was touched on in several posts, but here is an important one from me:
Rhino:
If styrofoam was used as the aggregate substitute, there would be small pockets everywhere. When the polymer reaches a certain temperature, it could explode. Not saying it did, but this is a plausible scenerio.
One day later on 7/16 I posted the following:
Almost forgot, I wanted to hash out the concrete question also.
Personally, I think that there is a high probability that there was no styrofoam in the concrete, but has anybody proven this?
WAHOR!!
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/48994
WAHOR!!
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/48994