Some Really, Really Stupid Stuff
We're talking stuff that makes Dylan Avery look brilliant and restrained here. First off, a little background. A student of Judy Wood's named Michael Zebuhr was killed in Minneapolis earlier this year in an apparent robbery. Tragic of course, and of course, some of the Deniers insist that it was because he was getting too close to the "Truth". Okay, that's nutty and paranoid, but at least it has some semblance of reality.
However, this post does not.
Perhaps Michael began to suspect that Professors Wood and Fetzer were trying to deceive people. Michael may have discovered the articles at iamthewitness.com that explain the deception in the 9-11 movement, and he may have started to realize that Scholars For 9/11 Truth is actually a nest of criminals.
Furthermore, if Michael discovered iamthewitness.com, he would have realized that 9-11 is just one of many horrendous crimes that the Zionists have committed during the past century. Michael might have started to discuss the attack on the USS liberty, the Federal Reserve system, the and Rothschilds.
If he were to inspire other college students to look into these issues, it would be devastating for the criminal network.
This site is apparently run by one Darryl Bradford Smith. He doesn't come right out and say it, but he appears to think that perhaps Fetzer and Wood had Zebuhr murdered.
Hey, I'm no fan of Fetzer, but that's even nuttier than Wood's Star Wars Beam weapon theory.
And for dumber, check out this thread over at JREF. Apparently Lyte Trip, the original poster, believes that a taxi cab's undamaged hood is the key to bringing down the entire 9-11 Official Story. Apparently this blog post is what inspired LT's fantasy, and it has the advantage of presenting it a little more straightforwardly.
What it boils down to is that they claim to have evidence that the plane didn't come in at the angle the government claims and therefore it wasn't the plane that actually hit the Pentagon but a missile and by mistake the plane was flying on the wrong trajectory, and since the light poles are down on the wrong trajectory, they must have been planted/pre-planned to make it look like they'd been hit, but because they're in the wrong place given the "real" trajectory, this proves that it was a setup by the government.
And they call the no-planers nuts?
posted by Pat @ 2:22 PM
22 comments
22 Comments:
Michael might have started to discuss the attack on the USS liberty, the Federal Reserve system, the and Rothschilds.
Maybe it was Alan Greenspan?
In regards to Lyte Trip's Post:
That's probably one of the most entertaining posts I've ever read over there. He is just getting his a$$ handed to him all over the place.
On a side note, I almost wish the guys from Mythbusters would re-create what happened and send Lyte cryin' home to his mamma'.
Sounds about right. I would guess San Francisco or LA. The west coast loves its crazies.
Lying Dylan, I'm in LA, let's go find the Louder Then Words faction out here and rip it up.
The 9/11 Denial Movement has already declared Fetzer, Jones, and Woods "government disinfo agents" over at 911Blogger.com.
It takes the "movement" an unusually long time to catch on to all those conspiracies going on within its own ranks.
WOW lot of people from LA. I am in the Valley
Me too, when around. Where you at?
I'm in Hollywood. You?
We got a Valley guy too. Nice.
wow lotta la folks. 15 minutes from LAX here.
I wonder if the truthers ever step back for a moment, look at what they were a couple of years ago, pretty "out there", and then look at how much more rediculous they look and act now, and say to themselves...
"OMG what the hell am I doing?"
TAM
Chatsworth actually, north Valley
"Sounds about right. I would guess San Francisco or LA. The west coast loves its crazies."
I hear it's very smuggy out there too. Good place to find CTists.
Though it's nice to see a lot of sane Californians on here. Good to know.
James, I don't see how this claim is any stupider than any of the other Denier crap. Exactly what passes for "normal" in that group? They must sleep under their beds with the lights on, how can they believe in anything?
DMan-
I'm from Upstate originally. I went to SUNY PLattsburgh for college. Dylan's givin our home turf a bad rep.
Any thoughts on the hood of that car?
Yeah.
The pole was sideways, not straight. Which if you look at LT's pics, you see the windshield is crushed in a sideways manner, towards the drivers side.
It would have to be. Even if the pole hit the car straight on like a spear, which is highly unlikely considering the direction the car was travelling, and the direction the plane was flying, the base would be sticking out of the windshield and the momentum of the car acting on the embedded part would cause it to rotate to the side. Crushing the windshield and damaging the dashboard, EXACTLY as is seen in the pics.
LT's entire premise rests on an innacurate drawing by a 70 year old guy, relating a traumatic event that happened 5 years ago. The drawing (which looks like my 4 year old did it) shows the pole more directly in front of the car than off to the side, and shows the "base" of the pole up in the air.
Thats it, thats the totality of his "evidence".
No room there for any margin of error. It couldn't possibly be that the man doesn't remember exactly which direction the pole was, or whether the base was really on the ground or not.
If you even look at the transcript of their "interview" the man says "I don't know, and I don't remember" when asked about it.
Its disgusting.
democrat said:
I think it is a difficult story, and, therefore, will not render any usable results. I understand where he is coming from, but too many factors to make any conclusions.
Glad to see you agree that the cab driver's account can't be used as evidence against the official version. I'd just like to see it explicitly stated.
Yep, the fact that the guy can't draw very well is a clear indication that a missile knocked over the light pole.
What the hell are these idiots on? Even if he could succeed in proving without a shadow a doubt that the cab driver is lying about how his windshield was broken, how is that at all relevant to what actually happened to the pentagon?
Dixiecrat, you try to appear open-minded. Just out of curiosity, what would it take to convince you the "OS" was factual?
Let's start with the prequesite that North America did not have any radar equipment at all.
I don't see why since that would contradict the OS and testimony of FAA officials and records. Going to try again without issuing a straw man?
Yeah same with pearl harbour. like, the japs had HUNDREDS of planes and not a single one was intercepted. There's something fishy there...
Oooh, and when the US dropped the A-bombs? Huh? How about that?
2 planes
2 bombs
0 intercepts
0 warnings
I'm telling you, the Japs LET them bomb Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It was all part of a Zionist plot.
Let's start with the prequesite that North America did not have any radar equipment at all.
I don't follow you. Who said there was no radar in North America?
0 out of 4 is too good to be true for the hijackers.
How many planes had been intercepted by NORAD over the continental United States prior to 9/11?
I'll give you a clue: it's very close to 0.
Would you care to guess how long it took?
Democrat said:
Switching to the real world in 30 seconds
Certainly true for NORAD. Unfortunately the FAA had trouble discerning which blips were the targets (and made one definitive mistake) leaving NORAD a gap of 9 minutes at the most to conduct an intercept. The previous response time for the single intercept of a hijacked airliner ever conducted over continental North America was 81 minutes. That's 9 times longer. 9 times longer. For a plane which never turned off its transponder.
Also you're wrong about 0 out of 4 planes aren't you? Because the Pennsylvania plane ditched by the hijackers when the passengers rushed the cockpit.
Post a Comment
<< Home