The Difference between Facebook and Twitter

 Preface :
For the first time in History the truth in events and motives is no longer the preserve of the establishment media. The internet makes it possible for individuals to “both know the  truth" and to "make it known". For the Christian, the internet also gives a greatly expanded means of “bearing witness”. It is also a window along the road to Jericho. ( Luke 10:25-37)  The hurt and injured show up here in real time and the Lord will hold us accountable if we “Pass by on the other side”.

To make a broad generalization, Twitter looks out at the world and Facebook looks in. 

(1) Twitter allows you to Follow or Unfollow virtually anyone you wish without apology.
 Facebook dredges up all sorts of complicated connections between people, you may have known or were known to someone you know, but I would be embarrassed to even claim such as friends, let alone share my recipes or baby pictures with such a vague or tenuous connection.

(2) Twitter does not allow you to be careless in your preparation. Whatever you have to say has to be brief and to the point because many people who are following you are looking at what you say as the curtain drawn briefly on the “window of your soul.”
Facebook allows you to carry on time after time (ad nauseam) to people who know you and are making allowances for that person they know.

(3) Twitter allows you to put the ideas first instead of the relationship. If you are following someone, you have the option without apology to Retweet your agreement or to challenge their views knowing full well that many other Followers on both sides of a debate are benefiting from the exchange. Further there is no apology to Unfollowing a person with which you share nothing.
Because Facebook majors on friends and maintaining friendship, the subject matter is innocuous  and decreasingly so. Whatever you say has to be nice. Unintelligible is better than quarrelsome .

(4) On Twitter, the ease of Following allows one to witness an active person's world view in action … and what you witness as others respond to the human drama is a catalyst to developing your own “world view” . 
Facebook (in my experience) frowns on anyone raising the level of posts to that exalted height. Keeping the contributions bland is the unspoken code. 

(5) Twitter allows you to make new friends from people who share some or all of your "world view”. You are a different person now when compared to who you were 10 years ago, and your world view, if you're  a free thinker, will undergo gradual change. For the Christian believer, this assumes your foundation in the Lord is like a “Rock”  - unchanging. In fact changes in your world view are to be considered the Spirit’s progressive revelation.
Facebook - majors on levels of association that are based on your social and family history. If your world view is maturing, the friends you have had in the past, will not be your friends now. They may have you in a box or channel that cannot be disturbed. New truth is not necessarily their game and many will refuse to take instruction from one they have known personally, or one who has obviously been influenced by persons unknown to them. Therefore, if you are going to participate on Facebook you must forgo any issue of real significance.

(6) Twitter is liberating in that it addresses the whole world. No one’s views are so unique that you will not find kindred spirits. Those kindred spirits properly joined together become a movement  and movements can become positive revolutions in a world of evil events .
Facebook can never aspire to this level.

This 9/11 Anniversary

On 11 September 2001, my wife and I watched the TV, as the second aircraft hit the South Tower of the World Trade Center. Like millions of others who were eye witnesses, we have always marked the anniversary, nay--- promoted the anniversary, in the simple hope that the victims will someday be avenged.

That day, some 4000 died. Now, there are hundreds of first Responders and NewYorkers, who are dying with respiratory diseases from the toxic asbestos laden dust that resulted from the explosive destruction of the two World Trade Center buildings. Worse still, millions have died in wars that are a direct response to the War on Terror for which 9/11 is the excuse .

September 11, The New Pearl Harbour, a 3 part film by Massimo Mazzucco, raises the bar for the "truth movement”. More and more factual and circumstantial evidence has come to light in support of the hypothesis that a very sophisticated crime involving 1000’s occurred, and the persons involved were not Arabs.

My expertise is military flying and on the strength of that knowledge, my same day conclusion was that this event could not occur in this airspace without the highest authority grounding the air force. In the years after, other expertise in other fields, most notably the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, have added knowledge which also makes the event impossible without the complicity or the  direct involvement of the highest levels of government. Having followed the expanding knowledge trail with great interest since the event, I find that Mazzucco brings together many other facts from  different quarters to reinforce the conviction that the insistence for a new enquiry should be pushed until it is achieved.

Here are some that standout :
(1) WTC buildings were built with asbestos insulation prior to restrictive legislation against its use. A series of upgrades would exceed the value of the buildings. Economically— they had to come  down. They were obsolete.
(2) Internal explosions prior to collapse has never been explained to me before. Explosive demolition requires major columns to be cut in advance of the sequenced take-down.
(3) The quantity and quality of the explosives and the temperatures generated by them were extreme, pulverizing and melting all types of materials so that very little could be identified.  
Q: Why? *   A: The explosives used (nano-thermite) and the temperatures reached, erased any possibility that the remains of the airline passengers, their luggage or the flight data recorder would be found intact. In fact, very few intact bodies were found; small body parts and bone fragments identified some; roughly 800 persons were vaporized. 
(4) Steel, still standing in the wreckage, had been neatly cut at angles commensurate with explosive demolition procedures.
(5) Maximum operating speeds (VMO) of the aircraft were exceeded by as much as 20% reducing exposure to the public on the ground. In addition all the pilots interviewed said that accurately hand flying an aircraft at those speeds would be impossible for them, let alone novice Arab pilots . - (another argument for Drones)
(6) Watch Larry Silverstein explain his absence.— no survivor remorse here. An astronomical insurance claim follows.
(7) Apparently it was common knowledge among first responders, that the WTC 7 building would also be destroyed. So much so, that the media picked it up, and a BBC reporter stated on air prior to the collapse that the event had already occurred. Not being a native of New York, and not  knowing the profile of the building, she can be excused that WTC7 is still standing in the background of the film footage. Q: Did the perpetrators count on the general level of shock to gloss over the fact that the building would fall 6 hours after the morning's events, without the impact of an airliner, and that the public would readily accept office fires as the explanation ?
....and finally....
(8) The passengers and the Cel Phone traffic from Flight 93, are technically impossible. At the end of what appears to be a scripted message to her husband's answering machine, CeeCee Lyles whispers- “ It’s a frame, It’s a frame” .

….  many more details.

An added feature is the introduction of the leading Conspiracy Debunkers —from the USA, Italy and France as well as NIST.  Their explanations are included followed by the rebuttal.  

Watching this is to gaze straight into the face of evil.

However-  judge not ! 
A new impartial enquiry is required to reach the truth. Surely the ever deepening fog of doubt surrounding this event justifies it.


* Note the many clips of explosive demolition in which the columns are cut and the concrete and steel falls in pieces that are easy to load and transport.