The links are great and you've convinced me to change my position.
That is what rational people do in the face of new evidence.
BTW, do I believe the government wasn't, in some way, complicit in the 911 disaster? No - I didn't say that. The fingerprint of bureaucratic bungling and self serving fiefdoms -- hallmarks of "government" -- are all over 911 (how did the Trade Center buildings bypass "code" requirements, again?). The fingerprints of government complicity all over pretty near everything of large scale in this country. I "believe" our government is corrupt to the core, self serving, murderous, and administered - mostly - by incompetents, criminals, and bureaucratic SNAFUs. I believe government is capable of anything.
But I am willing to let go of my "preponderance of the evidence" position that WTC 7 was demolished. I'm even willing to let go of putting any more energy into the 911 issue in general - it is mostly a distraction, anyway.
I think dwelling and talking on things such as 911, Illuminati, etc. cost the liberty movement far more than they gain us ... in way of energy, credibility and, ultimately, in adherents. Someone - it may have been Carl Sagan - said (in the context of science) "Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof" (sort of an inversion of the infamous truism that "the simplest explanation is usually correct". But even that is not it.
The main point? SPECIFIC EVENTS AND, ESPECIALLY, THEIR CAUSALITY DON'T MUCH MATTER TO THE CORRECTNESS OF THE LIBERTY MOVEMENT. We should learn a bit about them and move on. We should take the position of rationality, big picture logic, and morality. We are in this for the long run and there is no end point. Was The Fed created by a criminal conspiracy? It sure seems that way. Does that really matter after 100 years? No: the damning logical and moral evidence against The Fed and centralized banking/ fiat money stands on its own.
Correspondingly, an INDIVIDUAL's right to their liberty is NOT changed by "belief" and -- it doesn't matter how many people believe or disbelieve in an individual's liberty. Socialism may affect an individual's liberty but it doesn't have any relevance to the indivdual's moral and commonsensical rights to freedom and self determination.
More abstractly, but also rationally, history and logic (combined with basic knowledge of how individuals and social herds act) similarly speak to the end result to increasing versus decreasing freedom. Socialism chills; the only thing it ever has or ever could encourage is freeloading/ corruption. Socialism may be a great system for ants but it is antithetical to human nature ... both simple logic and the evidence of history are incontrovertible (which won't will never convince illogical and corrupt people ... so don't waste your energy).
Bill of Rights /Amendment X: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
Do you need a politician or judge to "interpret" those 28
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here: