Uncle Fetzer and the Keebler Elf Lady
Now we are on to two people who can actually make Kevin Barrett look sane by comparison, Jim Fetzer, who is interviewing Judy Wood for his radio show. I swear, if Charles Darwin were alive he would be rethinking this whole evolution thing after listening to this show. Judy Wood expounds on her "Star Wars weapons destroyed the World Trade Center" theory, while Fetzer repeatedly screams excitedly, "Wow!". At one point early on, after claiming that the elections would have gone even more for the Democrats had the Diebold voting machines not been rigged, he proclaims that Wood is, "The single most qualified person to study what happened on 9/11".
Yeah, she is so qualfied that she describes the collapse of the WTC as "going poof". Unfortunately, I was not able to follow her argument due to the use of such overly technical language.
Amazingly the whole point of this elaborate death beam plot was to destroy the World Trade Center (she incorrectly claims that no buildings not titled "World Trade Center" were damaged in the attacks) without damaging any other buildings, or damaging the "bathtub". If the bathtub had been damaged, Wood claims that would have flooded lower Manhattan and destroyed half of New York. She even claims that the energy weapon plot extends to other buildings, such as WTC 3 and 6, so that they would be easier to destroy later on.
Yeah, OK.
My favorite line has to be when Wood proclaims, speaking about her mysterious Death Star weapon, "Just because you don’t know of the gizmo, doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist."
Well, I don't know how to argue with that logic.
My new hero, though, has to be, Troy from West Virginia. He calls in at the 15 minute point of the second hour, with his West Virginia twang, and this incredulous sound in his voice. I had images in my head of Kyle from South Park cocking his head and saying "Really?".
Troy: I’m just also wondering, what makes you think that 200 technical experts from NIST would be wrong and your guest would be accurate?
Uncle Fetzer: Troy, Troy, Troy. Go to our website, ST911.org. We got a half a dozen dismissals. We’re talking about cutting edge research here Troy! I am not going back to NIST, they’ve been covering it all up. OK, thanks for calling Troy.
He then hangs up on him.
Yeah, real cutting edge research there Jim.
posted by James B. @ 10:34 PM
19 comments
19 Comments:
Conspiracy theorists are vile creatures. They use the victims when they are losing in an arguement or if they want to avoid a point of discussion.
Debunker: "Well explain why the NIST report makes no mention of explosive devices in WTC 1 & 2."
CTer: "Well why don't you tell Donna O'Connor she is wrong heh? Come on, what are you chicken? She lost her daughter in 911, why don't you say this to her face?"
The above, is what is truely disgusting.
I am sure PD will have a comment on this.
TAM
Judy Wood is a living testament to the fact that, on occasion, the laws of Darwin break down, and the laws of Murphy take over.
Anyone know the site of Woods and that other guy about the laserbeam, cause i could use a really good laugh :D
Nvermind, i found it, and indeed i'm gonna have a really good laugh :)
Hell that Judy Woods sounds like a 12 year old.
I wonder if even Fetzer believes this crap.
Someone got a Steinway in her head.
No offense intended Troy. I am from Seattle, in my mind everyone east of Spokane talks with an accent.
What a discussion between a denier and a sane person open to the conspiracy idea might sound like:
Denier: No way a bunch of arabs living in tents blew up the WTC.
Sane person: Yeah, No way!
Denier: There were no arabs, it was all Mossad agents that flew the planes...
Sane person: Um OK.
Denier: It wasn't Mossad, it was the CIA...
Sane person: Sure, I guess we did fund Osama, right?
Denier: It wasn't the planes that took down the towers, it was bombs, the planes were just a diversion.
Sane person: Um, OK bombs, but why fly the planes if you have bombs planted?
Denier: It wasn't only bombs, it was a CONTROLLED DEMOLITION...
Sane person: What? It doesn't look controlled at all! How could the explosives have survuved the plane crashe?
Denier: There were NO PLANES!! What?
Sane person: Are you kidding?
Denier: The planes were holograms or CGI...
Sane person: But wait, thousands of people saw the planes hit, and what about the passengers?
Denier: It was all a plot to damage the WTC "Bathtub", and flood lower Manhattan!
Sane person: But wait, even if the bathtub flooded, it wouldn't have overflowed the WTC foundation! Lower manhattan isn't below sea level! The Bathtub was only created because the foundation of the WTC had to be dub so low and tunnels that went under the hudson river entered it below sea level... oh forget it.
Denier: Not only were there no planes, and no explosives, but the entire disaster was peretrated by our government using a "Star Wars Beam Weapon".
Sane person: WHAT THE FUCK??? ARE YOU RETARDED??? That is the most idiotic thing I've ever heard. Are you on drugs? Seriously.
Denier: You're obviously a government shill.
Yeah, I think Ms. Wood confused New Orleans with New York. Fortunately Ray Nagin was not mayor of New York.
Finally PD sees the light ;)
Yeh, he just likes to stir op things. he don't care what really happened, he just likes the attention.
Well u got the right to find that compelling, although u won't get many supporters down here for that hypothesis ;)
Its guys like Fetzer that makes the "911 truth" movement look even more stupid.
How is it possible to find something compelling when the only "evidence" for it is that technically speaking, it maybe would have been possible if some department somewhere spent years researching it, and then got hundreds of people to help pull it off?
I think my Gremlin Demolition Theory is equally compelling.
Wow Alex, that indeed is really compelling!
Anyone tried to debunk that one yet?
It was Cartman. I think he caused 9/11, and then went all CT to throw everyone in South Park off.
Compelling?
TAM
I don't like Fetzer either. He doesn't let his guests speak and speaks for them. He does do a good job of paraphrasing their arguments for the benefit of guests, I'll give him that, but he is kind of a blow hard. The comment about Donna O'Conner was wrong, unless she agrees with the "CTs" and has given authorization for her name to be used in such a fashion. And it was the wrong reponse -- the right response was to explain why NIST did not find explosives, if you can. Did Fetzer make it?
I'm assuming when you guys make fun of Woods that you are aware that space-based beam weapons are a goal of the Air Force -- see, e.g. Vision 2020, and that the true state of progress would be highly classified. It still seems hard to believe that a beam weapon could generate such power from space. Could a space-based or high altitude mirror reflect a beam generated on earth back down? Don't know.
I'm not saying she is right, but you're going to have to do better than this. What she is saying is highly speculative, but she has made her assumptions and reasoning clear. It's a serious allegation, and deserves a serious response.
What she is saying is not beyond the realm of reason, unlike the mechanism of "global collapse" we are being asked to believe.
I'm not saying she is right, but you're going to have to do better than this.
Don't be an idiot. We don't have to do any better because her statement is preposterous. I feel no more need to debunk her x-ray laser theory than I would if she had suggested that the WTC was blown up by a meteorite impact. Both are "serious allegations" but both are also "beyond the realm of reason". If you can't understand that, well, I really feel sorry for you. Behind your pseudo-scientific veneer, you're so confused about life in general that you can't even differentiate between a plausible theory and an insane one.
Post a Comment
<< Home