The Keebler Elf Lady: Part III
If you are a real masochist, you can not only look at the Powerpoint of Judy Wood, giving her Keebler Elf presentation, but watch the video of her presenting it, on July 12th. It is full of cringe inducing moments.
After giving her presentation, not merely content to lie about the laws of physics, she decides to move on to lying about finance:
Judy: There’s the put options. A whole lot of stock options, orders of magnitude more, beginning on the 10th of September, the day before. So there is obviously foreknowledge. And those have not been checked into. It came out in the newspaper the following day. And it was worded, well those people haven’t come to claim their money so we can’t get them. You can’t buy stocks without a social security number and identification.
Host: Was this issue covered by the 9/11 commission?
Judy: No, I don’t believe so. I don’t think anything reasonable was covered by it. Actually David Ray Griffin wrote a wonderful book in response to that. The 9/11 Report: Omissions and Distortions.
Uhh, yeah, actually it was:
There also have been claims that al Qaeda financed itself through manipulation of the stock market based on its advance knowledge of the 9/11 attacks. Exhaustive investigations by the Securities and Exchange Commission, FBI, and other agencies have uncovered no evidence that anyone with advance knowledge of the attacks profited through securities transactions.130
The ironic thing is, if she would have actually paid attention to David Ray Griffin's book, a book she refers to as "wonderful" he spends 5 pages talking about the 9/11 Commission investigation into this. He disagrees with their findings of course, but he leaves no doubt they looked into it. Maybe she should read the Cliff Notes?
There are at least 3 other mistakes she makes regarding the put options, it was "not orders of magnitude more", the purchase of the "suspicious" put options did not begin on the 10th, that was the last day. And lastly you could not have stepped forward to claim your options the next day if you wanted to, the market was closed! How many stupid things can you say in one sentence?
posted by James B. @ 2:57 PM
16 comments
16 Comments:
To try and be fair...
She does pose some questions, and there is nothing wrong with that, but (a) here comparison of the wtc's to trees is flawed (in many ways) and (b) she is a supposed EXPERT in all this (mechanical engineer, materials engineer), yet the only theory of her own that she presents in her slide show is the "giving the balls a head start" theory. She doesn't go on to show how and why a "controlled Demolition" would produce the "Free Fall" of the tower and the "initial upward movement" of the debris.
If you look at some of the footage, you can actually see debris that goes up, then down, and actually moves to the ground quicker than the building colapsing, so how is the building in complete free fall??
She spues the same old stuff they all spue, but does not back up her own "Theories" with any scientific fact (that I could see anyway).
MV, LOL!
All I can think of whenever I hear about Judy Wood is that awful late 1980s song, "Girlfriend in a Coma".
Someone answer this:
Lets pretend all 767/757's crash where we were told.
Of the 1st responders at the Shanksville scene arriving within 30min after the crash, none reported seeing fires or thick black trails of smoke in the air from jet fuel fires.
Smoke trails and fires at the WTC and Penatagon lasted waaaaay beyond a half hour.
Why no long lasting smoke and fires at the Shankville crash site as with the WTC and Pentagon plane crashes?
Did Flight 93 Crash in Shanksville?
Of the 1st responders at the Shanksville scene arriving within 30min after the crash, none reported seeing fires or thick black trails of smoke in the air from jet fuel fires.
If you believe the first responders who say this, then why don't you believe those very same first responders who saw the pieces of the plane and held body parts in their hands?
because CTs like to "cherry pick" their evidence to put the peices of their obtuse puzzle together.
Lets pretend all 767/757's crash where we were told.
Next you'll tell us to pretend the Earth revolves around the sun.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Here is a problem I have with the Pentagon CTs:
1. Main theory that most Cts belief = A missile, not a plane or airliner, was used to hit the Pentagon.
2. Scholars 9/11 on National media quote Mineta as being proof of their theories on 9/11. Meanwhile, his direct testimony to the commission (which they whine about it being left out of the final report) contradicts their main arguement...here is the testimony quote:
Mineta: "During the time that the airplane was coming into the Pentagon, there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice President...the plane is 50 miles out...the plane is 30 miles out....and when it got down to the plane is 10 miles out, the young man also said to the vice president "do the orders still stand?" And the Vice President turned and whipped his neck around and said "Of course the orders still stand, have you heard anything to the contrary!??"
So if it was a missile, sent to pentagon via Cheney et al, then why are they even discussing a plane coming towards Pentagon, and why would Cheney respond in such a way?
That is why it is important for those of us who believe in the evidence, in proof, to organize all of the claims, both official, and alternative, and present the evidence for each. So far I have seen alot of great videos and texts to debunk a particular movie, or arguements back and for about particular pieces of evidence. Is anyone organizing a document from the scientifc, rationalist pov detailing all of the evidence, for all sides, and perhaps agreeing upon a grading system for various evidences, opions, claims. I started to do this, but the topics and claims are so overwhelming in sheer number and the amount of data on them, that I spent two days on it, and only covered 2 aspects of one theory.
911myths.com comes closest to what I would ultimately like to see in this regard.
The grading system I used for evidence was to give the highest grade to that evidence which was produced by multiple, trusted (by most of the public) sources. Also to give this level of evidence to opinions from experts (defined as PhDs in the particular field, or equivalent experts where PhD was not an option). These opinions had to be supported by multiple experts in the same or closely related fields. I also gave the highest grade for evidence that consisted of multple unrecanted eyewitness testimony, with at least 5 corroborating witnessed accounts (also unrecanted). The evidence gradings would decline from there.
I would like to see a group of like minded individuals come up with an agreed upon grading system for evidence, that can be used universally for all the evidence, and then just start grading it.
Of course, the flaw for us, is that the CTs will immediately call it "a farce" because what we consider reliable sources (CNN,NY Times, Boston Globe) are all in on the plot...oh well.
default.xbe said...since 93 didnt crash into an office building the amount of combustibles was much lower (bear in mind living wood wouldnt catch fire as fast and might not ignite before all the fuel burns off)
not even the grass under the trees that wasn't burnt or all the dry hemlock around the crater?
James B. said...If you believe the first responders who say this, then why don't you believe those very same first responders who saw the pieces of the plane and held body parts in their hands?
Why would I deny they saw planted debris?
The Artistic Macrophage said...So if it was a missile, sent to pentagon via Cheney et al, then why are they even discussing a plane coming towards Pentagon, and why would Cheney respond in such a way?
This might help:
Mineta: "During the time that the "airplane" was coming into the Pentagon, there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice President...the "plane" is 50 miles out...the "plane" is 30 miles out....and when it got down to the "plane" is 10 miles out, the young man also said to the vice president "do the orders still stand?" And the Vice President turned and whipped his neck around and said "Of course the orders still stand, have you heard anything to the contrary!??"
Does that help?
Why would I deny they saw planted debris?
So someone chopped up the body parts of the victims and then ran through the field throwing the pieces around? That is a pretty sick theory.
So... who is Ed G.?
I like when you source things to people named "Ed G.". Especially when they are the only official historical record available.
It would please you no end to publish the full names of the intelligence officers who contributed to the investigation, wouldn't it?
Too bad.
I was just looking through the Moussaoui trial evidence, and holy cow there is a lot, inclduing a ton of Photos, some of the pentagon that show a huge part of it knocked out, and much more...
http://www.rcfp.org/moussaoui/
I thought there was no investigation at all? You aren't accussing a "scholar" for 9/11 "truth" of lying to us, are you?
Post a Comment
<< Home