Sunday, January 14, 2007

You Have Got to Love What They Consider "Research"

I caught another episode of Kevin Barrett's "Truth Jihad" radio show, although I still haven't figured out why he calls it that, since Barrett seems to think that in the history of Islam, not one Muslim has ever carried out a "holy war" against anyone. In this week's show he has on Barbara Honegger, whom he calls a leading researcher in the 9/11 truth movement. Barbara's claim to fame is apparently that she is a "Senior Military Affairs Correspondent" at the Naval Postgraduate School, in Monterey, California, which probably says more about DoD hiring standards than anything.

Both her and Barrett repeatedly cite a "white paper" she has written titled rather awkwardly, "The Pentagon Attack Papers Seven Hours in September: The Clocks that Broke the Lie". Although this paper repeats a series of truther myths, such as automated missile batteries at the Pentagon, the crux of the paper seems to be, as indicated in the title, that the plot is revealed by the time shown on a couple of damaged clocks at the Pentagon. Honegger alleges that a cordite bomb (whatever that is) went off several minutes before an aircraft hit the Pentagon, and caused those clocks to stop. The fact that there is not a single witness to this event, in contrast to the numerous witnesses who saw a plane hit, is not discussed.

This interview, is full of just as many errors and outright falsehoods, but if I had to pick a section, it would be the following:

Honegger: The people who are following the $2.3 trillion that Rumsfeld himself admitted in a press conference before 9/11, September 10th that they couldn't find $2.3 trillion, that is half the GNP of the United States, the Gross National Product of the United States. You don't just lose half the Gross National Product out of the Pentagon budget.

Barrett: Yeah. It was well timed.

Honegger: They said the day before 9/11 they were going to track the money and on 9/11, the Army auditors, the financial management area of the Army offices were the very ones taken out by the explosions, which in my paper, the Pentagon attack paper, go read it, proves was the result of bombs inside the building to take out the Pentagon auditors who were following that 2.3 trillion.

Caller: Oh my Goodness.

Barrett: 2.3 trillion will buy quite a few bombs I would imagine. That would buy a lot of cordite.

We have alreay addressed this $2.3 trillion thing several times. First of all, it was not a press conference where Rumsfeld "admitted" this, it was mentioned in passing during a speech to a conference of DoD logisticians titled rather boringly"DOD Acquisition and Logistics Excellence Week Kickoff—Bureaucracy to Battlefield ". Furthermore, the reason they couldn't "find" the money, was not because it was stolen, but because of the antiquated accounting and IT systems, which is what Rumsfeld was complaining about in the speech! Anyway, read our previous posts if you want more on this subject.

The rest is just bad economics, $2.3 trillion is not "half the GNP of the United States" or GDP, she incorrectly interchanges the two. The GNP of the US in 2001 was around $10.2 trillion.

Finally, the idea that Rumsfeld would criticize the Pentagon's accounting systems, call for a change, and then launch a bomb attack to kill a couple of dozen accountants in order to stop these reforms is just idiotic. The truthers point to the number of accountants and finance people who were killed in the attack, as if it were anomalous, but just imagine how many of them work at the Pentagon? The Defense Finance and Accounting Service alone has around 16,000 employees. If a bunch of finance people were not killed, they would have used that as a sign of a conspiracy.

They continue:

Honegger: The real question is what the hell were they doing and had they been doing with half the GDP of the United States? That's the real question.

Barrett: Yeah. Where are they putting all that money?

Honegger: Well I think it is huge numbers of underground bases and in particular we know that Osama bin Laden father's company drilled the tunnels into the hills of Afghanistan when the CIA was paying them to do it to fight the Soviets there.

Barrett: You think they are using this money on underground bases?

Honegger: Yes, in part.

Barrett: Umm what’s your, well you see I don’t know too much about that, can you give me sources of information?

Honegger: Well that is a different program. The general question I want to get out here is what the hell have they been doing with one half the GDP 2.3 trillion, half the Gross National Product of the United States?


And these are the leading Truther researchers?

48 Comments:

At 14 January, 2007 15:45, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why do you think the clocks stopped, James?

 
At 14 January, 2007 16:05, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Speaking of the Pentagon: Will Morris, The Washington Post & The Devil Wears Prada

 
At 14 January, 2007 16:10, Blogger Unknown said...

Why are truthers under the assumtion that all clocks are set to the right time? There isn't a single clock in my house that is set to the same time as another. The only clock that I would consider accurate is my atomic clock, however the clocks mention by truthers are not atomic clocks. Plus I don't want to hear any bs about how its the Pentagon and everything is set to rigid military standards. Clocks were off when I was in the military and I'm pretty sure they are still off now.

 
At 14 January, 2007 16:10, Blogger James B. said...

OK, BG, let me introduce you to my good friend Occam's Razor. Which is more likely?

Donald Rumsfeld made a speech complaining about the DoD accounting system, and then the next day decided to kill some of the people working on it. So rather than placing some C4 or other advanced explosives, he stacked up a couple of kegs of gunpowder stolen from the set of Pirates of the Carribean in their office, and exploded the bombs 5 minutes early, for no apparent reason. This massive explosion was not noticed by anyone, and then 5 minutes later, they flew an A-3 Skywarrior into the Pentagon, which they managed to convince half of Washington DC looked just like an American Airlines 757, not to mention the fact that it contained the bodies of all the passengers.

Or rather:

A clock in the Pentagon was running slow.

 
At 14 January, 2007 16:13, Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's seems like Occam's Razor may be your multi-purpose, all-weather best friend.

 
At 14 January, 2007 16:14, Blogger James B. said...

Or rather I should say, "Which is a simpler explanation"? Keeping with Occam's Razor and all.

 
At 14 January, 2007 16:22, Blogger Alex said...

It's seems like Occam's Razor may be your multi-purpose, all-weather best friend.

That's the first rational thing you've said in, oh, roughly 2 months. It's just too bad that you were trying to be sarcastic.

 
At 14 January, 2007 16:28, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Perhaps I can explain my attitude about Occam's Razor, when we are talking about criminal matters.

In a criminal case, the standard in our justice system is "beyond a reasonable doubt". If I am ever on a jury, I look forward to holding the prosecution to that standard.

With respect to 9/11, I personally can't prove diddally squat.

If we are to know the truth and prosecute the guilty, it will be imperative that we have a real investigation. Can you imagine a prosecutor standing in front of jury and using a Occam's razor argument: "the accused did it because the idea that he did it is the simppliest explanation that fits the facts".

I could see a defense atty. trying to use Occam's razor to get his guilty client off, but I don't think it serves well toward meeting a high standard of proof.

 
At 14 January, 2007 17:37, Blogger Alex said...

It IS the defence theam that's using the Occam's Razor argument. When it comes to 9/11 CT's, YOU and your lunatic buddies are the prosecutors. Occam's razor certainly CAN be used in defence. Can you imagine a prosecutor in court saying "well, we're not sure exactly how the defendant did it, but we think he killed his wife with a laser beam from space"? Why would the defence bother with an in depth response? They wouldn't. The defence lawyer would stand up and say "your honour, we move that this case be dismissed" and the judge would say "gladly", and that would be that.

Structure a logical and well researched argument, and you'll receive a logical and in-depth response. But to the crap you've been bringing up so far? You're lucky you're receiving any response at all. You're the equivalent of the dirty bearded guy standing on a street corner screaming "THE END OF THE WORLD IS NEAR!!!". Nobody debates with that guy, for the same reason we don't bother seriously debating you - you're both fracking nuts.

 
At 14 January, 2007 19:44, Blogger The Artistic Macrophage said...

with regards to the OP, you know you are a full blown nutter without a clue, when Barrett actually begins to question what you are saying.

The reason he hasnt heard much about the 2.3 Trillion being held in or spent on underground bases, is because it is 100% fabricated crap.

TAM

 
At 14 January, 2007 20:01, Blogger Unknown said...

Why even admit it? This is part of that most brilliant/most retarted aspect of the 9/11 conspiracy.

Lets fabricate a super complex plan utilizing old and inefficient explosives with outdated and unique looking aircraft to set off two completly seperate explosions so that we can kill off accountants in an effort to hide our secret 2.3 trillion dollar spending while at the same time tell people that we spent 2.3 trillion thus making the whole conspiracy retarded and pointless.

 
At 14 January, 2007 20:50, Anonymous Anonymous said...

$2.3 Trillion gone missing and you go "ho hum just bad economics I guess"

There should be a revolt and protests in the streets to find out where it went.

I have opinions on many aspects of 911 and what followed, but this one takes the cake.

None of you will even leave the safety of your little rooms with the beautiful desktops and screen savers to do anything about it.

You just sit there in your oh so righteous and holy way and try to discredit what many are out there trying to do in getting to the bottom of this whole thing.

I bet you all have fat arses and don't get laid cause you don't have any sense or semblance of character.

I think there was a movie about you it was called "The Mild Bunch."

 
At 14 January, 2007 20:57, Blogger Simon Lazarus said...

If I were Rumsfeld, I would have bombed The NY Times or the Washington Post, instead of the Pentagon.

 
At 14 January, 2007 20:58, Blogger Simon Lazarus said...

All kidding aside, why are we not calling into these shows, programs, and radio snits and questioning these nuts? If point out to them the utter foolishness of their claims, perhaps they will just vanish out of pure shame.

It couldn't hurt!

 
At 14 January, 2007 21:00, Anonymous Anonymous said...

James. "and then 5 minutes later, they flew an A-3 Skywarrior into the Pentagon, which they managed to convince half of Washington DC looked just like an American Airlines 757, not to mention the fact that it contained the bodies of all the passengers.

Had you seen the clock?

Did you speak to half of Washington?

Did you see a 757

and finally did you see the bodies?

None of the above?

Wanker.

 
At 14 January, 2007 21:43, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Richard wrote: "Why even admit it? This is part of that most brilliant/most retarted aspect of the 9/11 conspiracy."

It really is. I'm sure most of us will agree with that there were likely "false flag" operations by a number of different governments in the past. We'll also likely agree that some of them worked and some of them failed.

But I don't think any of us will take the idea of a completely retarded, yet highly successful, operation seriously.

And that's really what these Truthers make 9/11 out to be: a completely retarded and amazingly botched false flag operation that somehow and miraculously succeeded in fooling the vast, vast majority of professionals who have looked at it...

 
At 14 January, 2007 22:19, Blogger James B. said...

$2.3 Trillion gone missing and you go "ho hum just bad economics I guess"

There should be a revolt and protests in the streets to find out where it went.


Hey buddy, buy a clue. Nobody is defending the Pentagon's accounting system, least of all Donald Rumsfeld who was complaining about it.

 
At 14 January, 2007 22:24, Blogger Alex said...

There should be a revolt and protests in the streets to find out where it went.

Why are all twoofers so retarded? Buddy, if 2.3 trillion had suddenly gone missing from the Defence fund, you wouldn't even have an army LEFT. I think someone might have noticed when 1.4 million military personnel stopped showing up for work.


Simon:

If I were Rumsfeld, I would have bombed The NY Times or the Washington Post, instead of the Pentagon.

I know you were kidding, but you hit it bang on. If you're going to kill a whole bunch of Americans anyway, why not hit strategic targets? The NY and LA Times would be perfect. What better way to guarantee good media than to blow up the offices of your biggest critics, and blame it on terrorists?

Incidentally, this is exactly why you'll rarely see an attack on US media, with the exception of Fox news. Our enemies understand the importance of good press. The NY Times is worth more to them than all the explosives in Baghdad.

 
At 14 January, 2007 23:19, Blogger Unknown said...

$2.3 Trillion gone missing and you go "ho hum just bad economics I guess"

There should be a revolt and protests in the streets to find out where it went.


So you can account for all of the money you have ever earned in your lifetime? This 2.3 trillion was over a long period of time, not overnight. It's not that it was stolen or it disappeared, it's just not accounted for. When your actually old enough to work go talk to someone in Accounting and they will tell you all about it.

 
At 14 January, 2007 23:29, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sure Richard that makes a lot of sense Hang in there apathy might just catch up to you.

 
At 15 January, 2007 00:59, Blogger Unknown said...

Ok.....Where did apathy come in? Maybe I should rush down to the Pentagon with a calculator and some scrap paper and work it out for the DOD. I'm not cheering wasteful spending or poor record keeping but every buisness is guilty of it. Where is the conspiracy?

 
At 15 January, 2007 01:07, Blogger Unknown said...

Do you not understand the concept of accountability? I can add up all of my W2 forms and get the exact ammount of money I have been payed since I started working (not including gifts, etc) After I subtract all of my receipts as well as the general worth of my material possessions I still can't account for where all of my money went. By truther logic it was either stolen or stashed away to make underground bunkers. In reality it probably went into food or other goods and services that I neglected to record.

 
At 15 January, 2007 03:43, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Richard

You pay the government to do the right thing and to be accountable.

This is not a household expenses accounting exercise.

The government has teams of accountants and pay accounting firms to ensure we the people know how our money is being spent.

$2.3 Trillion is not chicken feed.It doesn't just vanish into thin air.

You must ask where did it go?

You must tell them to account for it to your satisfaction and no less.

They work for you.

 
At 15 January, 2007 04:32, Blogger Alex said...

You pay the government to do the right thing and to be accountable.

Don't be stupid. This is a modern concept whose entire basis rests in a false premise. You don't get to dictate how the government runs itself - you merely decide who's in charge. Don't like their accounting policies? Too damn bad. Lobby a politician. This problem has been around since the US was founded, and it will likely be around for at least another decade. In the meantime, if you truly expect your government to be perfect in every way, move yourself to a boat in international waters and stay there. Have a go at running your own government for a while.

 
At 15 January, 2007 05:00, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Honegger also says April Gallop's wrist watch stopped at the bombing time 0f 9:32, or shortly after 9:30 anyway - as if this is relevant. Did the bomb detonate on her arm? Oh and the NY Stock Exchnage also closed at precisely 9:32 am, cleary an instant shut-down triggered directly by the bomb at the Pentagon.
She also cites several GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS who back her up almost exactly nonetheless. It's a bit odd in fact.

"The FAA’s [Federal Aviation Administration] timeline document "Executive Summary-Chronology of a Multiple Hijacking Crisis--September 11, 2001" reads: "0932: ATC (Air Traffic Control) AEA reports aircraft crashes into west side of Pentagon."[3] The time is the critical fact here, not the claimed cause.

Denmark’s soon-to-be Foreign Minister Per Stig Moller was in a building in Washington, D.C. on 9/11 from which he looked out, heard an explosion and saw the smoke first rise from the Pentagon. He immediately looked at his watch, which read 9:32 am. He gave radio interviews in Denmark the next morning in which he stated that the Pentagon had been attacked at 9:32.[4]

On August 27, 2002, then White House Counsel and now Attorney General Alberto Gonzales gave the Secretary of the Navy lecture at the Naval Postgraduate School in which Gonzales explicitly and clearly states that "The Pentagon was attacked at 9:32". A tape of this segment of his talk was played at the 9/11 Emergency Truth Convergence at American University in Washington, D.C. in July 2005, and is on the public record."


He said that right at her school, where she probably was the first person to have to report the "slip."

http://johnmccarthy90066.tripod.com/id206.html

 
At 15 January, 2007 06:02, Blogger Unknown said...

I bet they used the $$$ to build the Beam Weapon that destroyed the Towers :)

 
At 15 January, 2007 06:42, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Does anyone have more info on Honnegger? Is her publication public or private? If it is the former, exactly how does she remain on the payroll spreading slander? The DoD does have a good deal more discretion than say universities in policing employee conduct.

This might call for a letter to a Represetative or Senator. It is one thing to spread this crap if one is perverted actor or professional conspiratoid it is quite another if one is getting a taxpayer subsidy.

 
At 15 January, 2007 06:47, Anonymous Anonymous said...

There should be a revolt and protests in the streets to find out where it went.

Actually, if any of the 9/11 conspiracy theories were true, this should be the case. Since there is no revolt, not even among the twoofers, I guess their arguments aren't being taken very seriously.

 
At 15 January, 2007 09:35, Blogger The Masked Writer said...

Research from Pat

1.Honegger alleges that a cordite bomb (whatever that is) went off several minutes before an aircraft hit the Pentagon, and caused those clocks to stop.
Fact: Honegger does not allege a coordite bomb went off. She alleges that a bomb did, not a cordite bomb. If fact coordite is only mentioned 3 times, all attributed to witnesses smelling it.

Question: Pat did you state that in error, or did you state that to try to make Honegger look incompetent when she has been trained in the relevant field?

 
At 15 January, 2007 09:37, Blogger The Masked Writer said...

Structure a logical and well researched argument, and you'll receive a logical and in-depth response.

Bull-shit! At least not from you, Alex.

 
At 15 January, 2007 09:46, Blogger The Masked Writer said...

It's not that it was stolen or it disappeared, it's just not accounted for.

If it isn't accounted for then it could be stolen of course. And of course it doesn't mean that it was all stolen or all misplaced either. I'm sure you all are aware of the potential for massive finanacianl fraud that exists. How ironic also that WTC 7 held many many files on accounting scandals as well.

I'm not supporting one side or another on this issue, but I find it quite the kwainky dink that the terrorists just happen to hit the rennovated side of the building that happend to be the location of all these accounting issues.

Conspiracy or coincedence, you make the call!

 
At 15 January, 2007 09:52, Blogger James B. said...

Fact: Honegger does not allege a coordite bomb went off. She alleges that a bomb did, not a cordite bomb. If fact coordite is only mentioned 3 times, all attributed to witnesses smelling it.


She claims there was an explosion, inaccurately refers to cordite as an explosive, and refers to people smelling cordite. It is reasonable to draw the conclusion that she is hypothesizing a bomb made of cordite.

"Multiple witnesses said they smelled cordite after the initial explosion at the Pentagon, an explosive which has a distinct and very different smell from that of burning jet fuel."

Ironically, she cites that paragon of investigative journalism, the American Free Press in the footnotes.

Barrett also brings up buying bombs made of cordite in the interview, and she does not correct him.

 
At 15 January, 2007 09:57, Blogger James B. said...

BTW, I am not the only one to come to this conclusion, this is from Barrett's own website:

http://www.mujca.com/teaparty2.htm


Barbara Honneger, Senior Military Affairs Journalist at the Naval Postgraduate School, was there, exposing "the clocks that broke the lie" -- the clocks in the Pentagon that stopped when the first cordite bombs went off, more than five minutes before any airborne object impacted the building.


I suggest you write Kevin Barrett and indignantly demand a correction. I hear he is really open to corrective criticism.

 
At 15 January, 2007 09:59, Blogger James B. said...

but I find it quite the kwainky dink that the terrorists just happen to hit the rennovated side of the building that happend to be the location of all these accounting issues.


Huh? If you think that was the only accounting office in the entire DoD, you have obviously never had anything to do with the military.

 
At 15 January, 2007 10:19, Blogger Unknown said...

With all the damage to all the different financial institutions, we probably could come up with a conspiricy for each one

 
At 15 January, 2007 11:02, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Paulie wrote: "You pay the government to do the right thing and to be accountable."

That's pretty much what Rumsfeld was complaining about; the Pentagon's antiquated accounting process has created a breakdown in accountability to the tune of $2.3 trillion over some number of years.

Breakdown in accountability != conspiracy. It is something that needs to be fixed, and that's exactly why Rumsfeld brought it up.

What; do you think he was bragging?

"$2.3 Trillion is not chicken feed.It doesn't just vanish into thin air."

And it didn't. It was likely spent legitimately, but through inadequate record-keeping, exactly what it was spent on isn't known.

Again, this is certainly a failure of sorts, but why does it have to be a conspiracy. Do you honestly believe the government has never failed at anything before?

 
At 15 January, 2007 12:43, Blogger The Artistic Macrophage said...

coincidence...next question.

TAM

 
At 15 January, 2007 14:57, Blogger Alex said...

I always love Swingers attempts at defence through ignorance. He'll imply the most insane thing you've ever heard, without quite saying it, then when you respond to his implications he'll fly into a fit of righteous indignation because he never actually said that.

This guy must have had one seriously fucked up childhood.

 
At 15 January, 2007 16:11, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm trying to find out how Barbara Honegger holds a DoD job. Not much so far but this (appears to be from another twoofer) is interesting.

http://frustratingfraud.blogspot.com/2006/12/barbara-psychic-munchkin.html

Given her past legal issues I wonder if he holds the job as some sort of legal payoff, like an "untouchable" employee who sues everyone who comes within five feet of her and the brass just decides to keep on the payroll rather than dealing with the hassle of canning her.

 
At 15 January, 2007 17:26, Blogger Alex said...

She just seems to be good at telling people what they want to hear. More than one person has coasted through life on that ability.

 
At 15 January, 2007 20:01, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Cl1mh4224rd
finally a voice of reason amongst a bunch of incoherent babblers

 
At 16 January, 2007 04:16, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Actually, if any of the 9/11 conspiracy theories were true, this should be the case. Since there is no revolt, not even among the twoofers, I guess their arguments aren't being taken very seriously.
Thats just how twisted your arguments against a 911 cover-up are.
A completely different issue and you want to own it.
Another asshole just trying to score a few points and hopefully become accepted in his little internet community....you people are just unbelievably stupid that you would think people don't look beyond and behind the crap you 911 believers put out....you have already lost the game, the more you post, the more people will wake up and have a point of view and it won't all be yours, twoofer? No, free thinker yes. Not one of your posts have convinced me that there is not a government cover-up so from that point of view you have failed....attacking authors with some particular "evidence" they may want to put forward gives them more credence than some of them deserve, why? because it's press, bad or otherwise in that way you have failed again.

Pat James B and particularly you Alex you are failures.

Why?

For not honestly and fearlessly defining your objectives.

You sit in judgment of others hard work, thinking you know better. I haven't seen you out in the streets or talking to you congressman or doing anything constructive to at least get a closer look at what may be or may not be true.

The inadequacy of your whole game defines your failure. I can only hope you can go beyond name calling and do what I hope you had set out to do and that is put forward a plausible argument for what has happened and what is happening since 911.

The thing is you don't have all the answers because none of you were there.

You can only regurgitate what others have said or presented as a different point of view not facts...sometimes these people support your agenda and others not.

The fact is both believers an non believers use the same sources which then boils down to your point of view or if not supporting your agenda it is dismissed as loony or some other childish insult.

You cannot even begin to say you know anything as fact. how could you if you only get it from media sources.

This is a question I have asked many times and not any of you have given me a response beyond name calling and other childish garble.

If there is no cover up

Why doesn't the Government put out the video of the plane that is supposed to have hit the Pentagon (5 frames doesn't cut it) The have many views of this incident.
They can put this whole thing to bed once and for all


Bye Pat James B Alex, you have lost and have just been erased from my computer for good.

 
At 16 January, 2007 07:27, Blogger Alex said...

Hah. I love that last line. I'm picturing him running away from the playground with his hands over his ears, yelling "LA LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!!"

Goodbye and good riddance.

 
At 16 January, 2007 08:30, Blogger The Artistic Macrophage said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

 
At 16 January, 2007 08:30, Blogger The Artistic Macrophage said...


The thing is you don't have all the answers because none of you were there.

You can only regurgitate what others have said or presented as a different point of view not facts...sometimes these people support your agenda and others not.

The fact is both believers an non believers use the same sources which then boils down to your point of view or if not supporting your agenda it is dismissed as loony or some other childish insult.

You cannot even begin to say you know anything as fact. how could you if you only get it from media sources.

This is a question I have asked many times and not any of you have given me a response beyond name calling and other childish garble.


An honest to goodness gem in amongst everything else you had to say. I actually agree with some of this statement, in particular, the bit about us relying on others, as we were not there, and that we do pick and choose our sources. But it is a two way street, and the truthers are just as guilty as we are, if not more. If you look at the sources the truth movement uses, they are even less reliable, in the eyes of the general public, that those we quote.

I would also say that most debunkers here and elsewhere do use credible source, such as NIST, ASCE, FEMA, DOJ, FBI, MOUSSAOUI TRIAL, etc...not just media sources.

TAM

 
At 16 January, 2007 09:58, Blogger Alex said...

I'm just impressed that you had the patience to actualy read that diatribe. I read the first paragraph, and then skimmed along to the end.

Anyway, according to that logic, none of us really "know" anything. We don't know that there was ever a moon landing. We don't know that WW2 really happened. Hell you can't even know that you were ever born! Maybe you just sprang into existence from mid air - you don't know, you weren't there!

I hate that logic. One of the signs of a lunatic is that they'll question absolutely everything, except their own theories.

 
At 16 January, 2007 15:12, Blogger Unknown said...

I would disagree with some of the things said. My service in the Military gives me first hand knowledge of such things as thermate, c4, missiles, ADA and MASCALS. When I say that the idea of a cruise missile hitting the Pentagon is retarted that's from my training, not the media. I also live in New Jersey and know plenty of people who witnessed what happened on 9/11. Though its not first hand its better than most troothers.

 
At 16 January, 2007 19:45, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You sit in judgment of others hard work, thinking you know better.

What "hard work"? You fruitcakes invent slanderous accusations and then claim you are doing everyone else a favor? Don't flatter yourself, Paulie, all you are doing is spreading your loony hate-filled cult religion because it suits your world view.

The fact is both believers an non believers use the same sources which then boils down to your point

No. I'm not seeing your idiotic conspiracy theories promoted by credible news organizations. They do say that Islamic militants pulled off 9/11. Sorry, Nazis like Jeff Rense and professional conspiratiods like Alex Jones don't qualify as credible.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home