Friday, March 23, 2007

Reaction to Sheen and O'Donnell

Wonkette summarizes the situation rather well, I thought:

Washed-Up Whoremonger To Lend Credibility To YouTube Nut

Right Wing News says he needs a haircut. And a shave from Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, perhaps?

Allah says Rosie's getting a bad rap.

We know she’s a Truther, but a Looser? That’s the word from Access Hollywood in this link that people keep sending me, but as much as I hate to say it, I think big Ro’s the victim of a smear here. AH cites Page Six for news that Rosie’s involved in a new version of “Loose Change” bankrolled by Mark Cuban and narrated by Charlie Sheen.


Yes, I can't imagine that Rosie's going to have any real involvement in Loose Change other than pimping it on The View and her blog.

Labels: ,

16 Comments:

At 23 March, 2007 14:24, Blogger Col. Jenny Sparks said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 23 March, 2007 14:35, Blogger default.xbe said...

anyone see the new post on SLC Exposed? where Pat Proves hes Pat by Posting Pats Public Profile (say that 10 times fast)

Brainster

About Me
No information to display.

My Interests
No interests yet.

Meebo Instant Chat
Meebo Profile Not Setup.

Contact Info
No contact information available.


Link

 
At 23 March, 2007 14:53, Blogger BG said...

I was browsing (googling) for GTE airfone stuff, and ran across this document:

http://www.archives.gov/legislative/research/9-11/staff-report-sept2005.pdf

On page 80, I find:

With respect to Dulles International Airport, the expert told us that the quality of the screening of the hijackers was "marginal at best." He noted the
following deficiencies: incomplete and sloppy hand-wanding procedures, the failure to
resolve why two hijackers set off the walk-through magnetometers, the absence of
"random and continuous" secondary screening of carry-on baggage, and the failure to
properly rotate positions at the checkpoint. footnote618


Is the above statement the kind of expert witnesses that we need to understand 9/11?

What a crock of shit!

sloppy hand-wanding procedures

There are those at this blog who really believe sloppy hand-wanding procedures made a difference in letting those evil hijackers get away with it, aren't there?

 
At 23 March, 2007 15:00, Blogger default.xbe said...

There are those at this blog who really believe sloppy hand-wanding procedures made a difference in letting those evil hijackers get away with it, aren't there?

a "sloppy hand-wanding procedure" certainly could explain how they got boxcutters onboard

check-in security is a very repetive task, im not in tghe least bit surprised they can get sloppy, expecially sicne the hijackers were probably checked by the tail-end of the overnight shift

 
At 23 March, 2007 15:46, Blogger Manny said...

a "sloppy hand-wanding procedure" certainly could explain how they got boxcutters onboard

Unfortunately, it would not. At the time, blades under four inches were legal to carry on board aircraft. The hijackers could have (and indeed some may have, for all we know) just dropped the weapons into the little bin or left them in their carry-on baggage and sent them through the x-ray machine.

That said, the information is a useful read for those who say that the government has "gone too far" with check-in procedures with the shoes and the wands and all that.

In other news, bg has a) actually read some information about the 9-11 attacks that didn't come from prisonplanet and b) acknowledged the existence of hijackers. Good show, bg!

 
At 23 March, 2007 15:57, Blogger Alex said...

I guess miracles do happen after all. Way to go Bill!

 
At 23 March, 2007 16:18, Blogger Col. Jenny Sparks said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 23 March, 2007 18:16, Blogger debunking911 said...

Different day, same crap...

 
At 23 March, 2007 19:10, Blogger Col. Jenny Sparks said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 23 March, 2007 19:34, Blogger The Artistic Macrophage said...

As long as you and your ilk try to con the unknowing, the naive, the unsure, that your unfounded baseless claims are truth, I will be here to point them in the proper direction.

I'll be here as long as your kind are. Get use to it.

TAM:)

 
At 23 March, 2007 20:26, Blogger Col. Jenny Sparks said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 23 March, 2007 20:34, Blogger Col. Jenny Sparks said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 23 March, 2007 20:49, Blogger debunking911 said...

I'm frustrated because I can't stoop to the levels of the conspiracy theorists and lie to people in order to sell books and harass people. I rather do this knowing people read my site and make up their own mind, I don't care if I'm the only person on earth doing it. But I'm far from the last person doing it...

As long as there is BUNK I'll be DEBUNKING it.

Don't get so cocky, I monitor the conspiracy sites and it looks like they're losing people, not gaining. I often get e-mail from people thanking me for pulling their head out of their ass.

If you go to my site you just might hear a "POP" yourself... ;)

 
At 24 March, 2007 08:56, Blogger 911_truthiness said...

Well I and breakfast with my sister and her "life partner"

You would think a lesbian active in gay rights would blindly support Rosie, Think again, she is very mad at her because as she put "we have enough problem without being thought of as a bunch of conspiracy theorist nut cases"

And it's not just her but she said many in the movement are equally disgusted. "We may be gay, but not stupid".

 
At 24 March, 2007 10:53, Blogger pomeroo said...

How does one distinguish Jenny drunk from Jenny sober?

 
At 24 March, 2007 20:18, Blogger Alex said...

When she's drunk, she gets more "affectionate" than usual. Othwerwise, no difference.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home