Monday, December 11, 2006

NY Critics Pick Best Film of 2006

And, in a shocking upset, it's not Loose Change. It's the film whose reviews I was looking for when I came across the Loosers.

"United 93," a tense drama focusing on one of the hijacked planes used in the September 11 attacks, won the best picture prize on Monday in the New York Film Critics Circle Awards.


Great choice!

23 Comments:

At 11 December, 2006 12:47, Anonymous Anonymous said...

'United 93' Promotes 9/11 Govt Conspiracy Theory

 
At 11 December, 2006 12:55, Blogger James B. said...

14) The pilot must have spoken in English, as also heard on the ATC tape.

Air traffic Controllers otherwise couldn't have got them translated.

Therefore the claim, that Arab speaking passengers had been in the cockpit, is a bold lie.



Someone who speaks Arabic cannot also speak English?

Just how dumb are you people?

 
At 11 December, 2006 12:55, Anonymous Anonymous said...

REALLY?!?!?!?

Those claims have been debunked long ago, seriously enough with the cell phones. BG do you hurt yourself often by accident? I have a hard time believing that someone who seems to have no logic or memory can go day to day without burning himself on the stove because he forgot it was hot.

 
At 11 December, 2006 13:31, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why Didn't NIST Model the Complete Utterly Devastating "Collapses" of the WTC Towers?

 
At 11 December, 2006 14:01, Anonymous Anonymous said...

dem,

My best estimate of what the best outcome could be at this blog is that it can become a big food fight in the comment area.

It's the tone that Pat and James have set, so there's no stopping it.

I've got my pudding supply and I'm going to hurl away.

 
At 11 December, 2006 14:24, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Lying_Dylan said...

Love You.

 
At 11 December, 2006 14:24, Blogger Unknown said...

It constantinually amazes my how little the toofers know about the towers and how they were built

 
At 11 December, 2006 14:28, Anonymous Anonymous said...

stevew,

seems like we've had this conversation before.....

 
At 11 December, 2006 14:47, Blogger Alex said...

I have a hard time believing that someone who seems to have no logic or memory can go day to day without burning himself on the stove because he forgot it was hot.

That's because his mommy makes him wear oven mits 24/7. He even has to wear his safety-helmet to bed.

 
At 11 December, 2006 15:00, Blogger Unknown said...

Yup and you still have no clue about it, just the same dumb questions that have no relivence

 
At 11 December, 2006 16:04, Blogger The Artistic Macrophage said...

PD:

You seem to think that debunkers and deniers cannot be friends? One of my friends is a devout 9/11 "truther".

I guess for you it is either love'm (the truthers) or hate'm (the debunkers), hmmm?

TAM

 
At 11 December, 2006 16:11, Blogger shawn said...

I guess I don't exist, as I'm a native English speaker who can speak basic Arabic.

 
At 11 December, 2006 16:59, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm not satisfied with being regularly insulted and accused of mental illness just once or twice everyday, so I'll throw out this meat to the wolves, so you can step up the pace.

Lexington Comair Crash Supplemental: The *Bill Giltner* Mystery
from Alex Constantine's Political Conspiracy Research Bin

 
At 11 December, 2006 18:07, Blogger Triterope said...

The *Bill Giltner* Mystery

You're a mystery, all right.

 
At 11 December, 2006 19:43, Blogger telescopemerc said...

Why Didn't NIST Model the Complete Utterly Devastating "Collapses" of the WTC Towers?

Ignorance at its best. I can't decide wether you or the author of that blog is dumber.

Do you or the writer of that blog have any clue as to what is required for modelling the events leading up to the collapse? Do you realise that modelling the collapse would take approximately ^3 the computing power, at a bare, bare minimum.

Oh, and before you get even dumber and say something stupid like 'just run the program longer' you should know that modeling programs don't run for very long periods well, and when they crash they lose all the data they've worked on. Oh, and the most likely thing to bring about a crash is a dramatic change in the variables, such as the start of collapse.

One more thing: modeling programs are designed for specific modeling purposes, not for the events that happen afterwards (the exception being car crash modeling programs), so demanding that they should model a collpase with a program designed for structures is like demanding that an18 wheeler win the Indy 500, or demanding that Diablo haul a dozen Ottomans.

Next time, please, just try talking to an Engineer. Please.

 
At 11 December, 2006 20:07, Blogger The Artistic Macrophage said...

lying_Dylan said:

I do admire you for this.

Well I thank you for the complement. I don't think it takes too much to be friends with someone like this, as long as you are able to seperate the person from their beliefs. Now I will grant you, this guy, while headlong into the MIHOP area of things, he is not a "spouting it to everyone he sees" types. He plods along on his own blog, and links to other sites, but doesnt go nuts on forums or the like.

The thing is, I knew him before be got into the CT stuff. I think he is a stand up guy, who believes in the "inside job" theory. I just think is extremely misguided/misled. I have told him this, and we simply agree to disagree on it...and we have left it at that.

TAM

 
At 11 December, 2006 22:33, Blogger Nyke said...

Also, another comment about the English thing.

The official language of aviation is English, so they'd have to learn Aviation English or otherwise they'd never get into the pilot's class.

 
At 12 December, 2006 05:29, Blogger Unknown said...

Tam
These modeling programs are currently being used to design the CVN21 and do all the symulations and have been used for a long time for these applications

 
At 12 December, 2006 07:56, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Democrat said...

Gosh if only Hitler were alive today, he would be soooo proud of the troothers.

I think he would be amazed what could be done with a single TV in each household.


Dem,

I chuckled when read this. However, I think it would be incorrect to focus on the TV as the main brain washing mechanism. Radio is very powerful. Newsletters by Churches and other special interest organizations are powerful. Mainstream press (newspapers, mags) are very powerful.

Movies are very powerful.

Although I realise the Orwellian tie-in with TV, I think it's makes our argument (about how much manipulations there is) weaker if one uses the TV stereotype.

 
At 12 December, 2006 08:05, Blogger The Artistic Macrophage said...


You mean "United 93 Part III", a follow up to the original "Flight 93" and "Let's Roll: Flight 93 part II".

So stupid.


I wonder what Mark Bingham's mom would think of your comments?

TAM

 
At 12 December, 2006 12:11, Blogger Alex said...

It's not TV Hitler would be impressed by, it's the internet. Where else can a whole bunch of lunatics gather to create their own altered reality? TV is limited - most people only use it for entertainment, and it's pretty much useless as a brainwashing medium unless you control ALL the networks (yes,yes, I know, the "Zionists" right?). The Internet on the other hand is the ultimate brainwashing mechanism.

 
At 12 December, 2006 12:29, Blogger Alex said...

You kidding? The government can't even get support for the Iraq war. Hell, Bush's approval ratings are at what, 30%? Yeah, the government's GREAT at brainwashing people....

 
At 12 December, 2006 15:01, Blogger shawn said...

I am sure government would make use of it if that would be true.

It's so sad watching you people project over and over again.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home