I just forced myself to watch CNN jewsmedia for an update on the "Sniper Suspects"... These 2 guys who started out as an "unrelated matter" on CNN are now not only the snipers but they are also responsible for an attack on a synogauge in Seattle, Wa. THIS FUCKING BLOWS MY MIND. Now they are labeled as muslim extremists, I guess its just co-incidence that bush wants to attack the muslim-extremist-terrorist harbouring/funding iraq/Saddam?!? *And Israel is having problems with the muslim country natives that are pissed off about their land getting jacked* What led up to these guys arrest again? Because there was no evidence for this case. The sniper left a bullet and footsteps or whatever evidence they wanted to leave(notes, phone numbers). Law enforcement was powerless and clueless so they made that shit up about the 2 white guys in an astro as a bone 2 throw to the public because they had NOTHING (indirectly of course, it was a black ex-con, who easily was believed then disbelieved). Then an "ANONYMOUS TIPSTER" told them to "look more closely at a robbery shooting (an unrelated street crime)" A tipster hey? the only break in lawenforcements case is? TA DA a mgical voice on the phone with information only some1 with or connected to law enforcement resources could have?... O.K so now we know who the snipers are, a 41 year old "homeless drifter" and a 17 year old Jamaican immigrant, but where are they? O here they are! They're sleeping in their car with a high powered sniper rifle of course! O you silly professional snipers who can kill people in busy high trafficed areas in broad daylight and get away without a trace are sleeping in a car with their rifle, reeeeal pros, goes right along with their modus operandi! Of course they did it now lets ship them off to virginia and have they're case expedited so we can put them to death on T.V. Justice is served, but dont forget they were muslim extremists attacking America (feul for the attack on muslim jihad Iraq). If this was a trial based on evidence they're are only 1 of 2 possibilities they did it and the bullet in they're Seattle Wa, tree stump back yard matches the bullets in the people or it doesn't.

My theory:

The setting: The nations Capitol and surrounding area. Political tensions run high with the president wanting to go to war with iraq
The atmosphere: People will not leave their house or go near there windows, pump gas or go to work for fear they will be next.
The theme: manipulation of govt. political process.

The story: The individuals who perpetrated these acts (sniping only, not the synogag attack), were hihgly trained professionals who knew how to remain undetected while operating in a dense commercial/residencial/high security environment. My guess is they were extremists but they did not reveal their organization for random terror is more effective for their interests. Most likely they are white America patriots or local muslim related* though because both have an interest in not engaging the country in high cost war(human life and taxpayer money) over isreal/greed interests**. So what do they do? They shut down Americas capitol covering the populace with a blanked of fear. The snipers communicated with the govt. that much the media tells us but they didn't tell us what the snipers said. Now these people have a city cowering on its knees in the dark and there is no way of protecting themselves short of shutting everything down, also they are an organization who can have people in every majour city doing the same thing, thus their LEVERAGE over the govt. "A person will die every day until you do =insert demand here=" or something like that, of course the media woulden't tell us if they're trying to manipulate = insert sensitive political process =. So lets discuss their possible agenda, could it be that this is related to the events that are unfolding regarding the middle east? What would they want to change about it? If they wanted to change something do they have the sufficient leverage? Yes, stop it and YES. Now the law enforcement cant stop them because they have no idea who they are or where they will strike next, the only certainty is that they will strike again and again, so what are their options?

1. Deny the snipers demands, everyday someone will die and the cops will keep searching white vans or flying around 24/7 in helicopters on the off-chance that they will be there when the sniper strikes, it didn't work for the first 14 days but hey maybe they'll get lucky and the sniper will leave a fingerprint on a bullet he leaves in someones head. Also there is a chance that this is just a taste of the terror, it could start happening in every majour city.

2. Comply with their demands and the snipings will stop.

If the government selected option 2, which I think they did, they will not tell the public. But the public will still be screaming for justice, enter the scapegoats discussed above. It seems like these poor fucking guys are responsible for every unsolved crime in America. And now the public will believe anything it sees on CNN, this server the bush/ZOG agenda of war with muslims/iraq because they can connect these guys to anything they want ie. synogog attack, no good dirty muslims who hate everything American... my brain hurts i'll finish this later...

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lionhart:
I just forced myself to watch CNN jewsmedia

My theory:

The setting: The nations Capitol and surrounding area. Political tensions run high with the president wanting to go to war with iraq
The atmosphere: People will not leave their house or go near there windows, pump gas or go to work for fear they will be next.
The theme: manipulation of govt. political process.

The story: the bush/ZOG agenda of war with muslims/iraq ... my brain hurts i'll finish this later...

---

A public service clarification summary by the Hyperborean Illuminati.

hyperborean?

I started a reply but gave up when I realized you started this post with the statement that you "forced yourself". That pretty much says it all...that and your distorted compilation of the facts.

You really haven't followed this closely have you?

Nox

I said "forced myself" because i find it hard to swallow that propaganda tripe, i mean were a consumeristic society but we dont have to buy everything and yes i've been following this closely, did u read it?
i didn't go into depth on every aspect or this document would be 2 pages long. tell me where my facts are distorted please

Dude!

They ARE muslim extremists. If you've got a better definition, let me know.

I'm sure they did most of the shit they are accused of, but that is a juries' job to decide.

Most likely, if a federal jury doesn't give them the death penalty, then they will give the states a shot until they are condemned to die.

If the federal jury decides to kill Mr. Muhammed, then he will be dead in about 4-5 years. If a state jury decides to kill him, then he will likely die of old age on death row. The feds don't bullshit around with death sentences.

***First of all read the art of war***
You need to understand the WHOLE SITUATION.
Ok, think of a politically minded orginization that has no respect for our *corrupt* democratic system (ie. White America patriots or well organized religious extremists, they DO exist.) One that uses sutble and effective military like activism to achieve its goals and has *access* (use of spies/connections with similar interests) to information. Sensitive information such as a highler level political processes in congress involving Bush's agenda of war with Iraq *A VERY SENSITIVE WOLRD POLITICAL ISSUE RIGHT NOW*. He HAS made it clear that he wants to do this.

Estimated cost of SUSTAINED CONFLICT in the gulf *see related links*:$200,000,000,000 thats 200 BILLION. He CAN NOT play his game without the money, money but does NOT currently have slated for military use. To secure these funds he has to divert them from public programs and agencies ie. public education budgets,public service budgets etc.
To do this he has to have a motion passed in congress, unbeknownst to the public because public opinion is a dangerous thing, especially to Bush's agenda. Hidden from the public by censorhip of the media as opposed to letting us "know" what's happening, so the "organization" have no power there. This motion nonetheless has to be passed to secure the funding. A stumbling block.

Now this organization has power, terrorism works, domestic terrorism works better. The snipings were very simple and VERY effective and the threat of increasing intensity also carries weight(bark is just as loud as the bite), for this organization has the resources and what the govt. has seen is just a taste which will be made known to them. Using this technique as a tool to gain leverage over the authorities, the authorities responsible for protection of its own people. Leverage large enough to make their demands carry WEIGHT.(ie. stopping a sensitive poltical process)
The organization communicated to the authorities but we were not told anything of what was said. VERY effective, for the government will not tell the public it is being manipulated. Pertaining to my previous article *please read*, the government will be left with 2 options. A rock and a hard place. So they give in because the snipers will keep coming, creating an image that the government is powerless to protect its own people and all the very negative implications that has. Back to the drawing board for Bush. Now for some scapegoats to throw to the outraged public*see previous article*. Not only are they avenging this heinous act perpetrated upon their citizens,
but by pointing the finger @ muslim extremists they garner more public support for war on Iraq and ultimatly his agenda. Damage control.

This is my theory, because if u you think big it all makes sense to me, well most of it. Discuss my observations with me plz.

Info Links: http://www.msnbc.com/news/824011.asp?cp1=1 http://www.counterpunch.org/gordon0930.html http://www.house.gov/budget/safdefens.htm this link is the official budget before the proposed war on iraq notice it says the reserve war budget

[This message has been edited by Lionhart (edited 10-30-2002).]

You damn Whitey's! You enSLAVE me for 400 years and then you make me a scapegoat. I didn't escape no damn goats you CRACKA!

What do you think the reality of the situation with the snipers is? You really think that the case went from ZERO evidence to suspects in custody all because of an anonymous tipster? Look at the circumstances of world politics right now, look at what and where it was happening. The sniper effectivly had washington on its knees. Think of the leverage that creates... what we think we know has been fed to us via BIASED JEWSMEDIA.
Or maybe i should just sell scripts to Tom Clancy...

Lionhart!

Instead of looking at the state of the world, I suggest you take a look at the history of crime and criminology.

You�ll find that many suspects are found in similar ways to how the snipers got caught. Statistically so many that what happened in this case was totally plausible. Therefore it is not (in itself) pointing at a conspiracy.

Two guys who shoot unknown people at random are not sane in the first place. Either they have been mentally unstable for a long time, or they "snapped" all of a sudden. What happens next is that they feel more and more powerfull for each murder they commit, especially as long as they keep the police in the dark. They become more and more delusional and therefore more and more careless. Look at the history of serial killers and similar, and you�ll see that this very often happens.

In the case of the snipers it means that it�s more typical than unlikely that they should be careless enough to sleep in the car where they could be found. As they also evidently used the car as a shelter for the shootings, it�s not strange in itself that they kept the weapon there. It actually fits their modus operandi.

It is said about the older suspect that he recently converted to Islam, and that could also fit into the picture. People who experience a personal crisis (wich he evidently did as he started killing his fellow citizens at random) very often loose faith in the religion they believed in up until the crisis. Therefore it�s very likely that he converted to Islam. If it is also true that he took part as soldier in the Gulf war, it�s likely that his personal crisis involved his experiences in the war. One of the more common feelings in such cases are feelings of guilt; in this case guilt towards the Iraqi people, the Arab world and the Moslem world. If so, it�s plausible that he starts his private terror "war", killing innocent US Americans the way he perhaps feel that he killed innocent Iraqis in the Gulf war. That he also attacks a synagouge fits perfectly into this pattern.

In some cases people have more conciously become terrorists, as a result of a personal crisis or "snap", but then they usually (try to) join a group, (there�s for example one guy from Sweden with a history like this, who joined the Taliban and ended up among the prisoners on Cuba).

This is one of many more or less similar scenarios that are very plausible, not least because things like this have happened many times. A lot of people behind bars have personal histories, including the history of their crimes and how they got caught, similar to this.

As you might have noticed, there are conspiracy theories seemingly "prooving" or at least hinting at, that the US government should have been behind the 9/11 attacks; also to get a chance to go to war. From what I have seen these theories have failed to connect the attacks to any US authority whatsoever. They also fail to give plausible details for the governments reasons.

In the part of your theory that suggests similar actions from the government and/or US authorities, you have used the standard scenario for conspiracies, more reminiscent of the X-files than of the history of conspiracies (or the modus operandi of conspirators, if you prefer).

First you selectively hint at strange and "inexplicable" things related to the snipers; like the "magic voice from nowhere". Then you take a huge leap over to the Big Conspiracy, involving US domestic politics, US foreign politics, US and world economics, ZOG (whatever that�s got to with it) etc and so on. You also both hint at and clearly say that the government either planned the sniper attacks, or used a sniper team that happened to start shooting people, very conveniently for the government. The latter is much more "magic" than the phone-call, by the way.

You say that they did this because of the US state-finances and their urge to go to war against Iraq. But excactly as the conspiranoiacs who accuse the US government of 9/11, you fail to give reasons for this kind of desperate actions. There are other and more effective ways to change the public oppinion, I can assure you.

Ewige Blumenkraft! FoxLeonard

Fox there arent you thinking?
REASON FOR DOING THIS:
STOPPING A WAR WITH IRAQ THAT THEY MIGHT FEEL IS FOR UN-AMERICAN INTERESTS OR BECAUSE THEY FEEL IT IS A WAR THAT ISRAEL IS ORCHASTRATING AGAINST MUSLIM STATES.

BETTER WAY?: The government was under increasing pressure from the public to protect its citizens and the authorities didn't have a clue, and they weren't going to get one if the sniper didn't want to leave any. It's not like 9/11 can you see that? 9/11 was striking a blow, these snipings were gaining LEVERAGE, do you know what i mean by leverage? look it up because they had it. Now they hold the power because they cant be stopped and the "G" knows it. If you want something done you dont punch someone in the face when you can twist their arm.

PLUS
These types of orginzations sit around and think about how they can change things that they dont like. I just thought about this and it makes sense, you think someone who sits and thinks all day on how to use the vulnerabilities of the states to their advantage. wouldn't you say that this was capitalizing on a vulnerable aspect of the states control from a terrorist/revolutionist P.O.V?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lionhart:
Fox there arent you thinking?

---

Well, I would certainly hope so. And I know that you are thinking as well.

quote:

---

REASON FOR DOING THIS:
STOPPING A WAR WITH IRAQ THAT THEY MIGHT FEEL IS FOR UN-AMERICAN INTERESTS OR BECAUSE THEY FEEL IT IS A WAR THAT ISRAEL IS ORCHASTRATING AGAINST MUSLIM STATES.

---

In other words, the very opposite of how I happened to read your theory. Perhaps I would have understood that the first time, if you hadn�t sprinkled your text with state of the art conspiranoia clich�s. Next time I suggest you do what you just did in the quote above; say it straight out.

quote:

---

these snipings were gaining LEVERAGE, do you know what i mean by leverage? look it up because they had it.

---

As english admittedly is my second language (or one of my second languages) I looked it up to make sure. It meant what I believed it to mean.

If you in this way also want to say that I misunderstood your theory because of my lack of knowledge in (american) english, I would say it�s possible, to some extent. It is harder for me to get the grips of a somewhat muddled text in english, than of a similarly muddled text in swedish. I was in this case also biased by the 9/11 conspiracy "theories" I refered to. But still, as I can clearly understand you now, when you make a summary, my advice above stands firm. Say it straight out, without any attempts at dramatic scenarios.

quote:

---

Now they hold the power because they cant be stopped and the "G" knows it.

---

There is a HUGE step between having gained some leverage, and to actually hold the power. And, assuming for the moment that your theory is correct, I�m not as sure as you are, that the sniper terrorists did gain some leverage for their cause; to stop a war against Iraq.

But I don�t have enough insight in domestic US politics, nor in the US peoples oppinon, to be able to make a correct estimation of that.

Perhaps you, and preferably also other US Americans who read this, could fill me in.

Has there been a change in the US people�s oppinions about the war on Iraq? If so, is it possible to connect that change to the sniper drama?

Is there a plausible chance/risk that the US government would obey the demands of a home-grown anti-ZOG militia, or any similar terror group?

FoxLeonard

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lionhart:
What do you think the reality of the situation with the snipers is? You really think that the case went from ZERO evidence to suspects in custody all because of an anonymous tipster? Look at the circumstances of world politics right now, look at what and where it was happening. The sniper effectivly had washington on its knees. Think of the leverage that creates... what we think we know has been fed to us via BIASED JEWSMEDIA.
Or maybe i should just sell scripts to Tom Clancy...

---

They didn't have anybody on their knees- the media did. The reason the FBI "found" the snipers at last is because the snipers asked for TEN MILLION DOLLARS. That ten million of tax payer's money would then LEAVE THE HANDS OF THE SYSTEM WHORES, and that would be outrageous. The snipers were used as tools, but they proved how effective sniping is!

quote:

---

Originally posted by FoxLeonard:
Has there been a change in the US people�s oppinions about the war on Iraq? If so, is it possible to connect that change to the sniper drama?

---

According to the press yes. However, according to the press the American people are opposed to President Bush. Unfortunately, ALL the polls show different results.

Among my associates, the more that is found out about this sniper, the more resentment is being directed towards any and all terrorists.

I am currently reading the book, "Brighter than the Baghdad Sun". Unfortunately, our press is failing to print much of the information contained therein. So to get back to answering your question...I don't see the same change the press reports.

Nox

Thanks Nox!

Seems to me that the press in USA does what all press and media tend to do, more and more: they try to set the agenda instead of commenting upon it. A strange case of collective delusions of grandeur...

But that belongs in another thread.

I assume you have also answered my second question, by not answering it, so to speak.

The only trouble now is that Lionhart seems to have lost interest in his pet conspiracy theory.

FoxLeonard

quote:

---

Originally posted by FoxLeonard:
I assume you have also answered my second question, by not answering it, so to speak.

---

No so. My brain fixated on the first and I forgot the second.

The short answer is no. No for the current President. However, the moron who preceded Mr. Bush (William Jefferson Clinton to be precise), would have fallen all over himself to satisfy the demands stated in the polls. If his (Clinton's) pollsters would have reported that the majority wanted it, Clinton would have responded accordingly, whether it was good/consistant/logical/et al or not. That clown spent 8 years trying to create a legacy which in the future will be reduced to one sentence (like every other leader): He was the second President to be impeached.

Nox

Thanks again!

And I got it right the first time, as I assumed you ignored the question because the answer was a very obvious "NO!".

Interesting comparition with Clinton...

Well, now let�s see if the originator of this thread has anything to add...

..no, not about Clinton...

FoxLeonard

quote:

---

Originally posted by FoxLeonard:


Seems to me that the press in USA does what all press and media tend to do, more and more: they try to set the agenda instead of commenting upon it. A strange case of collective delusions of grandeur...

FoxLeonard

---

You're right Fox, the media tries to set the agenda instead of commenting upon it, most notibly the CNN newsgroup. They have effectivly taken the sniper topic and ran away with it. Run all the way to the electric chair with it. These "suspects" are being constantly bashed on and speculated against by analysts and the other talking heads on T.V, being blamed for every unsolved anti-semetic/muslim crime since 1986, all this does is increase the publics lust for their blood. http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/11/02/sniper.shootings/index.html
and the image that the media has built of these guys, by having their families on T.V selling them out and pschoanylists telling us why they did it, makes it all the much easier to believe they shot @ a synogog or whatever else the media's* agenda calls for.

It stinks of fabrication people. http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/11/02/sniper.probe/index.html
They do not have direct evidence that these guys did the thing in montgomery either, no video only eye-witness accounts. The ballistics tests now are said to have been inconclusive. But it doesn't matter these "muslim extremist terrorists" will fry... justice will be served. It doesnt' matter who these guys are the public needs to see heads roll.
I get the feeling i'm flogging a dead horse though, peolpe are just being distracted from the larger issues.

quote:

---

Originally posted by FoxLeonard:

There is a HUGE step between having gained some leverage, and to actually hold the power. And, assuming for the moment that your theory is correct, I�m not as sure as you are, that the sniper terrorists did gain some leverage for their cause; to stop a war against Iraq.

---

Sun Tzu said:
"Therefore, onehundered victories in one hundered battles is not the most skillful.
Subduing the other's military without battle is the most skillful."

Here's the deal. You know of political actions regarding Bush's agenda of war with Iraq. You dont have the resources to fight a war with a super power such as the states.
Why fight the U.S.A army when you can "nip it at the bud"

Now when an event such as the passing of a bill in congress comes up regarding funding, it's actually one of THE MOST pivotal aspects of the process of declaring and preparing for a war. And to an orginization with limited resources it is vulnerabilites like theese that they have to capitalize on to effect change. Like the Star Wars rebels vs. the deathstar#1.

quote:

---

Originally posted by FoxLeonard:


Is there a plausible chance/risk that the US government would obey the demands of a home-grown anti-ZOG militia, or any similar terror group?

---

Yes, leverage is leverage, it doesn't matter who has it over you or how they got it, it works. For example: You drive your car everyday, you need it to drive to work etc., your car is powered by gasoline, Oil companies want more money so they raise the price 10 cents, what can you do? Pay-up or walk, no way around it. The oil companies have leveraged you because you are dependant on their product. Manipulation through leverage, its an age old tool that has been used for business and politcs all throughout history.

Sun Tzu said:
"Now the general is the safeguard of the state.
If the safeguard is complete, the state is surley strong.
If the safeguard is flawed, then the state is surley weak"

The snipers were making the govt. look flawed. This is where they drew their leverage from. The image that they can safeguard their public was being attacked and they were offered an alternative (satisfing demands that = cessation of sniping) that became more and more appealing.
What do you do if you are the govt.?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lionhart:

1. Deny the snipers demands, everyday someone will die and the cops will keep searching white vans or flying around 24/7 in helicopters on the off-chance that they will be there when the sniper strikes, it didn't work for the first 18 days but hey maybe they'll get lucky and the sniper will leave a fingerprint on a bullet he leaves in someones head. Also there is a chance that this is just a taste of the terror, it could start happening in every majour city.

2. Comply with their demands and the snipings will stop.

If the government selected option 2, which I think they did, they will not tell the public. But the public will still be screaming for justice, enter the scapegoats discussed above. It seems like these poor fucking guys are responsible for every unsolved crime in America. And now the public, in their bloodlust, will believe anything it sees on CNN, this serves the bush/ZOG agenda of war with muslims/iraq because they can connect these guys to anything they want.

---

[This message has been edited by Lionhart (edited 11-03-2002).]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lionhart:
They do not have direct evidence that these guys did the thing in montgomery either, no video only eye-witness accounts. The ballistics tests now are said to have been inconclusive.

---

Are we watching the same newscasts? Inconclusive? Since when?

You are correct about the eyewitnesses...almost. In Alabama, one is still alive.

Are you really following what's going on or are you just trying to get someone to talk to you?

Nox

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nox:
Are we watching the same newscasts? Inconclusive? Since when?

You are correct about the eyewitnesses...almost. In Alabama, one is still alive.

Are you really following what's going on or are you just trying to get someone to talk to you?

Nox

---

I was actually watching CNN while I was writing this article, this is where I got my information... If you go to CNN.com and look at the "facts" they say "possible sniper weapon used" because the ballistics tests are "inconclusive". Evidence doesn't matter though, the people have already found these guys guilty in the court of public opinion. And another thing, they just found another gun at the scene in montgomerey... JUST, the lawenforcement made no arrests immediatly after the "unrelated shooting" but it seems they can come back after a month and find fingerprints and a weapon.... So what is it then, your lawenforcement is eathir fucking incompetent or they're lazy pieces of shit who dont care about solving cases because this evidence would have been @ the scene right after the incident and it seems none of it was found then. Also a convienience store is a highly trafficked area, how could a fingerprint(malvo's) on a piece of paper be found 1 month later when they had NO IDEA who they were looking for, no tape to see what they touched? ALSO Malvo is a immigrant/minor, howcome his prints are on file? Did he commit a previous crime?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nox:

Among my associates, the more that is found out about this sniper, the more resentment is being directed towards any and all terrorists.

---

It seems the media is doing their job correctly with you. All "terrorists" eh? What about the Palestinians? (This issue is much larger, I'm trying to prove a point)

The Israeli govt. gets 3.5 billion a year from the states alone in repartations for WW2, they also recieve weapons and training from the states. The Israeli's are well trained and well equiped, they are also are continually occupying/annexing land from the palestinians who cant afford tanks or even paying an army 4 that matter. So the only way they can strike at their oppressors is by strapping bombs to people who volunteer. They do this out of necessity because they have no military, political or economic leverage to stop the isreali advancement in their territory. Do you consider these people as "evil"? For they can do nothing else other then sit by and watch their land be taken from them. The point is that the media/government tells YOU who the terrorists are, making it their agenda who dictates who the terrorists will be. The Taliban? terrorists. Even though your government trained them, paid them and hailed them as "freedom fighters". The Palestinians? terrorists. They can not compete with Israel's U.S sponsered military might so they resort to martyring out of necessity. Throw yourself at the mercy of CNN and find out who the terrorists "really" are...

Bleh

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lionhart:
Bleh

---

Aimed at me?!

If so, let me say this.

I thought you had a theory about what could have happened and the reasons behind it. Therefore I thought you might want to discuss that theory, including its faults in logics and in certain facts.

I tried this and you went on to prove your theory, while I hadn�t made an attempt to disprove it. I just pointed out that parts of it seemed very implausible, for a lot of reasons that has nothing to do with this particular case, but also compared to the official version of it.

To get a better perspective, I tried to get someone else to say what they see happening in relation to the snipers. When Nox answers you dismiss it and continue to prove your theory - or, should I say truth.

Probably the latter, because you don�t seem to believe yourself to have a theory. You seem to KNOW that you have revealed the Truth about the snipers. You also know that media are lying about it, wich means that everybody else lies along with them - if unwittingly.

As much as I could have discussed the rights and wrongs of your theory as such, wich you are not interested in, I also realised along the way that I know too little about the details of the sniper case, and about domestic US politics on a daily basis. This makes it hard for me to follow parts of you reasoning.

Then it is of no use, nor help, that I try to discuss it with you. For this I am sorry.

And this is not to totally dismiss your theory, much less you.

Keep on questioning the world!

Be sceptic, but don�t forget to be sceptic also to your own scepticism!

FoxLeonard