Friday, January 29, 2010

Just Alex Being Alex



It was a nice, peaceful protest rally before Mr Jones poked his snout in. Note in particular that these people are natural allies of Alex; there's even a bunch of "We Are Changing Diapers" members there.



Some great entertainment value here.



While we're on the topic of Alex, I can add a tidbit of information from Matt Brown. One of the things that always amazed me (and came up in several radio interviews with Dylan) is that while Jones was an executive producer of Loose Change Final Cut, he had no involvement whatsoever with Loose Change 9-11 An American Coup. Dylan refused to explain the circumstances, but apparently Jones failed to include reasonably standard language in the contract giving him a claim on derivative works or sequels. Jones apparently blustered and threatened lawsuits when he found out about AAC, but never followed through.

Hat tip to my poker buddy Shane, who mentioned this to me last night just prior to getting his Aces cracked twice in succession. That was painful to watch, even if it did put me in the money!

Labels: ,

113 Comments:

At 29 January, 2010 09:13, Anonymous nwoisbunk said...

Alex is an absolute grandstanding dickwad. I've been listening to his show on my IPod for laughs and he is one of the worst interviewers I've ever heard. He's worse than Arsenio Hall. He constantly interrupts his guests and callers, talks over them. I don't know why anyone likes this asshole.

 
At 29 January, 2010 09:28, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

Ha ha ha, if anybody is a candidate for an outstanding cointelpro redux it's AJ.

Fantastic, what a douche.

Anyways, the government wants to take guns away. Why? Because the government is tyrannical, that's why. But... government conspiracies don't exist, especially not in America. There was no conspiracy to invade Iraq, according to SLC and friends.

Keep pushing the party line!

 
At 29 January, 2010 09:36, Anonymous nwoisbunk said...

" But... government conspiracies don't exist, especially not in America."

I don't know who says that.

However, I seriously question how many government conpsiracies have ever been uncovered by professional conspiracy theorists.

 
At 29 January, 2010 09:37, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

I mean it's like....

Before 1979, there was no Al Qaeda (or the precursor of it) in Afghanistan.

Then America intervened, sent CIA agent Tim Ali El Osman and look where Afghanistan is now.

There was no Saddam until America put him into place to wage war with Iran.

There was no Al Qaeda in Iraq until we invaded. Now the place is crawling with freedom f... errr terrrrrrists.

Somebody is doing a bad job at fighting the terrrrrrrists! LOL!

 
At 29 January, 2010 09:54, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I beat my kids on a daily basis.

 
At 29 January, 2010 09:59, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

" But... government conspiracies don't exist, especially not in America."

You miss a lot, don't you, moron?

"Anyways, the government wants to take guns away. Why? Because the government is tyrannical, that's why."

No, reactionary leftist governments want to take guns away.

Thank Cthulu that the Founding Fathers were smarter than the dickwads.


"There was no conspiracy to invade Iraq,"

Well, there was a lot of planning for the invasion, if you want to call that a "conspiracy", well, whatever floats your crazy boat....

 
At 29 January, 2010 10:03, Anonymous Anonymous said...

any more debunking around here, debunking 9/11? fail....
debunking the gitmo suicide conspiracy? fail...
debunking of christmas bomber inside job? EPIC FAIL

 
At 29 January, 2010 10:08, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Before 1979, there was no Al Qaeda (or the precursor of it) in Afghanistan."

And when did the Soviets invade Afghanistan, dickwad?


"Then America intervened, sent CIA agent Tim Ali El Osman and look where Afghanistan is now."

Just where it's always been, dickwad.

"There was no Saddam until America put him into place to wage war with Iran."

Saddam took over in 1979.

He invaded Iran in 1980, dickwad.

"There was no Al Qaeda in Iraq until we invaded."

Except for all the liason with the Saddam government, the training camps and the pro-terrorsit propaganda.

Oooops.

"Now the place is crawling with freedom f... errr terrrrrrists."

Now the place is a free and independent country, dickwad. It'll take a long while to finish up the "insurgency", but they're getting there.

"Somebody is doing a bad job at fighting the terrrrrrrists! LOL!"

Well, we won in Iraq, and we'll win in Afganistan, if O!bama doesn't cut and run like his reactionary leftist base wants him to.

 
At 29 January, 2010 10:08, Anonymous Bitchslut said...

Dumbunkers post nothing but failed lies. Got 911 facts? Got Sunder's failed explanation? Angry Hand is typing at YOU, Curley and Bennett. 2+ seconds is an ETERNITY to you fools, who have no explanation for it at all. Not even from NIST. And yet you still think you have facts. Epic Fail.

 
At 29 January, 2010 10:09, Anonymous Lazarus N'Obrain said...

I'm a foolish moron who likes to post nonsense, no matter what handle I use.

 
At 29 January, 2010 10:10, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"debunking the gitmo suicide conspiracy?"

Anyone know what Krazee is nattering about this time?

He's making less sense than his normal abysmally low standards.

 
At 29 January, 2010 10:11, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

" Bitchslut said...
Dumbunkers post nothing but failed lies."

All I can visualize is the Cowardly Lion toying with his tail, eyes closed, mutering "I do believe in spooks" over and over and over again.

 
At 29 January, 2010 10:12, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Lazarus N'Obrain said...
I'm a foolish moron who likes to post nonsense, no matter what handle I use."


OOOOOOO, Krazee is talking to the voices in his head again.

 
At 29 January, 2010 10:13, Anonymous Mudsharky Roberts said...

Lazarus, reading your posts is like watching a basking shark in a sea of ignorance, not unlike Malarky76's idiocy. I'll give you a tour of my +2 Binder of Answers, and then maybe your debating skills will improve. Don't expect any real analysis, though, as I specialize in obfuscation, uncritical credulity, and abject cowardice. Ask my pupils, Shat Hurley and JamesBDSM. They also like to watch what I do with fish.

 
At 29 January, 2010 10:17, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Mudsharky Roberts said...
Lazarus, reading your posts is like watching a basking shark"

Thanks, Krazee.

I enjoy eating insane types for breakfast.

"I'll give you a tour of my +2 Binder of Answers"

No thanks, I have an aversion to reading insane crayon scrawls.


"Don't expect any real analysis, though, as I specialize in obfuscation, uncritical credulity, and abject cowardice."

Yes, all Twoooofers™ are like that.

 
At 29 January, 2010 10:25, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

"Well, there was a lot of planning for the invasion, if you want to call that a "conspiracy", well, whatever floats your crazy boat...."

There sure was "planning", ROFLMAO.

"Two years before the 9/11 attacks on America, George W. Bush told a Houston journalist if elected president, “I’m going to invade Iraq.

Bush made the comments about starting an aggressive war to veteran Houston Chronicle reporter Mickey Herskowitz, then working with Bush on his book “A Charge To Keep,” later brought out by publisher William Morrow."


Yep. Plan ahead. He who fails to plan, plans to fail, right right?

Talking about plans, have you checked into that clinic yet, Dorothy? I've found myself a real side-splitter about "Lazarus Long". Sitting comfortably? Okay I'm dropping the bomb. This is what our fascist friend Lazarus Long named himself after:

In the book, Lazarus does at one point travel back in time and have sex with his mother, but this affair happens after the birth of Lazarus. Heinlein did, however, use a similar plot in the short story "All You Zombies—" in which a character does become his own ancestor.

"A rugged individualist with a distrust of authority, Lazarus drifts from colony world to colony world, settling down for a few years or a few decades and leaving when things get too regimented for his taste—often just before the angry mob arrives.

The Lazarus Long set of books involve time travel, parallel dimensions, free love, consensual incest, and a concept that Heinlein named pantheistic solipsism—the theory that universes are created by the act of imagining them, such that somewhere the Land of Oz is real."


Have been traveling back in time, fucking your mother in the land of Oz again, Lazarus? Busy, busy I guess. LOOOL!

 
At 29 January, 2010 10:34, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

Do read about Lazarus Long.

Absolute golden. The Gods of irony are working overtime, aren't they fruit loops!

Anyways, apart from the "consensual incest" (lol!) Lazarus Long engages in, I'm sure him being a "strong character" gives you a boner and all. Everybody needs a hero! Ha ha ha ha. You are one sick character, LL, I gotta hand it to ya. Right up there with Oedipus.

 
At 29 January, 2010 10:37, Blogger Pat said...

And now perhaps someone could explain to us what "Roid Rage" is and how smart it is to give yourself that nickname?

 
At 29 January, 2010 10:42, Anonymous ShitBrain76 said...

Pat Cowardly rears his bulbous, sagging grey head again, and for what? More 'debunking'? Of course not.

:) :( ;)

 
At 29 January, 2010 10:42, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Pat said...
And now perhaps someone could explain to us what "Roid Rage" is and how smart it is to give yourself that nickname?"

Just another insane Twoooofer™, one with delusions of gender.

 
At 29 January, 2010 10:47, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

And you know what?

Watching the vein throb in his forhead caused by his apoplectic, frenzied reactions to getting his ass handed to him on a platter time after time after time is just so.....amusing.

 
At 29 January, 2010 10:49, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

Pat: it was given to me by one of your blog visitors, it gave me a chuckle and I adopted it! I mean, it's not like I'm fornicating with my mother in a parallel universe or anything. I guess I do appreciate a sense of humor.

But anyways, I'm glad you showed up to show support for your faltering minions. I say: lead by example!

Care to go on the record stating there was a working relationship between Al Qaeda and Saddam? That Saddam had something to do with 9/11? That the Bush admin didn't lie about Iraq and didn't torture people? That Hitler was a lefty? That nano-thermite "doesn't exist" at all?

Solidarity is everything you know. Your sycophantic lackeys need you.

 
At 29 January, 2010 11:15, Blogger Pat said...

No strong relationship between Al Qaeda and Iraq; I am sure there was some contact. Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11. The Bush Administration certainly made mistakes in the case they presented about Saddam's WMD; I do not know if they consciously lied. I also don't know if the EITs constitute torture; it's certainly arguable from both sides. If you want to say Hitler was a right-winger, feel free, as long as you acknowledge Mao, Stalin and Pol Pot as lefties. Nanothermite exists, but again, Steven Jones' latest iteration claims that it was used as a fuse to ignite conventional explosives, which puts us back at the beginning; where were the deafening explosions we hear in other controlled demolitions?

Hoffman's theory about nanothermite in the ceiling tiles is freaking hilarious.

 
At 29 January, 2010 11:30, Anonymous Anonymous said...

why the lack of debunking, no word on the underwear bomber? how goes the debunking of kurt haskell? not to well, i hear
read it all right here!

oh yea now the fbi says kurt haskell was right, the underwear bomber did get help at the airport debunk away dipshits, i'll check back and have a laugh in bit

 
At 29 January, 2010 12:07, Anonymous Damocles said...

Wait wait wait... Saddam didn't come into power until 1979? I thought he came into power in the 60's, or was that just the Ba'ath party?

I would love to see Alex Jones' IRS statements. He has to make six-figures off the advertising on his site alone. He's not an agent of the state, hes a useful idiot making lots of money.

Also, I called you Roid Rage because you seemed really, really angry and aggressive on one of your earlier posts (at least I think it was you). At least it's just a handle and not your literal state as you're an armed mercenary in an urban setting.

 
At 29 January, 2010 12:07, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"That Saddam had something to do with 9/11?"

No one ever said that, moron.

Sheesh.

The Straw is strong in this one.

 
At 29 January, 2010 12:19, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

Pat says "they made mistakes",and certifiable loony tuner PornBoy allows that "well,there was a lot of planning for the invasion".You mean "planning",wink wink,nod,nod,must say,must say ol' chap.Looks like the Debunker Cult poster has been rolled up tightly and placed in a hard plastic tube.R.I.P. Bozos! Hey Paddie:Mao,Stalin and Pol Pot combined couldn't hold a candle to the Conquistadors or,say,the English when they were ruling half the world.What exactly are you hoping to salvage out of this moronic colloquy?

 
At 29 January, 2010 12:30, Anonymous Damocles said...

What exactly are you hoping to salvage out of this moronic colloquy?
I'm guessing that he's trying to point out that forced collectivization killed scores of millions of people. In the case of Pol Pot, he killed a quarter of his people trying to create a "pure" agricultural society.
And the British in the 1920s controlled a fifth, not half, of the world's land surface.
Was there a point to comparing 20th century totalitarians to Colonial Era Europeans?
Or do you just regurgitate poorly structured Soviet propaganda as a habit?

 
At 29 January, 2010 12:53, Anonymous Patrick from Cincinnati said...

I don't think our new visitors understand that our eyes easily glaze over their silliness.

 
At 29 January, 2010 13:08, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

Take that sword out of your bunghole,Big D.How'd you manage to fall on it right there? Is that the same Soviet propaganda that motored the American Indian Movement,as per one of the more colorful socks from your drawer?! Euphemistically speaking,you really are quite daft."Colonial Era Europeans",how quaint.You know,when Ty Cobb hit Detroit in the early part of last century he was a man on a mission too.They said that he "was still fightin' the Civil War!" Same thing with you CashMoney,you're still fighting the Cold War.All your rhetoric is last century's stale sandwich,with your ham fisted and tongue tied approach mucking up the entire program.As if "Colonial Era Europeans" (excuse me while you blow Andrew Jackson) aren't the same thing as Mao and Stalin.By erecting cheap euphemisms to whitewash the terrors of the European Conquest (Era?) of,among other places,the entire Western Hemisphere,you reveal yourself as three spoons shy of a tea set and a complete Troglodyte.

 
At 29 January, 2010 13:11, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

Take that sword out of your bunghole,Big D.How'd you manage to fall on it right there? Is that the same Soviet propaganda that motored the American Indian Movement,as per one of the more colorful socks from your drawer?! Euphemistically speaking,you really are quite daft."Colonial Era Europeans",how quaint.You know,when Ty Cobb hit Detroit in the early part of last century he was a man on a mission too.They said that he "was still fightin' the Civil War!" Same thing with you CashMoney,you're still fighting the Cold War.All your rhetoric is last century's stale sandwich,with your ham fisted and tongue tied approach mucking up the entire program.As if "Colonial Era Europeans" (excuse me while you blow Andrew Jackson) aren't the same thing as Mao and Stalin.By erecting cheap euphemisms to whitewash the terrors of the European Conquest (Era?) of,among other places,the entire Western Hemisphere,you reveal yourself as three spoons shy of a tea set and a complete Troglodyte.

 
At 29 January, 2010 13:12, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ty Cobb was an inside job?

 
At 29 January, 2010 13:14, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Arhoolie said... "

Good job, assholio.

Your incomprehensible, opaque insane rants are approaching art.

Now why don't you go cut an ear off?

 
At 29 January, 2010 13:25, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

"Wait wait wait... Saddam didn't come into power until 1979? I thought he came into power in the 60's, or was that just the Ba'ath party?"

You must have misread. 1979 was in reference to Afghanistan and Brzezinski.

About US sponsorship of Saddam's murderous regime:
Exclusive: Saddam Was key in early CIA plot

"He's not an agent of the state, hes a useful idiot making lots of money."

He just reminds me of the stereotypical agent provocateur, is all. You can't prove it. However his trumpeting prior knowledge of 9/11 combined with his behavior gives me pause.

"At least it's just a handle and not your literal state as you're an armed mercenary in an urban setting."

That's it. I'm packing up, I've been exposed. :P

 
At 29 January, 2010 13:27, Anonymous billy rutherford said...

hows it going

 
At 29 January, 2010 13:27, Anonymous Patrick from Cincinnati said...

Do they still prescribe lithium? I hear about new head drugs all the time, but I never hear about lithium. Perhaps Arhoolie should get on that old standby.

 
At 29 January, 2010 13:28, Anonymous Guanoroo said...

Pat flees yet again from the implications of gravitational acceleration, which he's afraid to address or explain.

"where were the deafening explosions we hear in other controlled demolitions?"

They were reported at the scene, idiot, and some can be heard on video.

Your argument failed over 8 floors, Pat, and your ego & corpulence took you down the rest of the way. You have nothing of value to say, even on your own blog. Take a tip from Lazarus and just post a word salad. It makes more sense than what you usually have to say.

 
At 29 January, 2010 13:32, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

Arhoolie: Lol!

 
At 29 January, 2010 13:48, Blogger BG said...

I'd like to invite everyone to this event on Sunday:

Northeast 9/11 Truth Conference January 31, 2010

http://www.boston911truth.org/dnld/911_Jan_31_2010_Northeast_Conference.pdf

I also invite all to make comments wiki page update here:

http://911truth.wetpaint.com/page/Northeast+9%2F11+Truth+Conference+January+31%2C+2010

 
At 29 January, 2010 14:14, Anonymous New Yorker said...

Before 1979, there was no Al Qaeda (or the precursor of it) in Afghanistan.

Um, right. You know what also wasn't in Afghanistan before 1979? This little thing called the Soviet Union.

Then America intervened, sent CIA agent Tim Ali El Osman and look where Afghanistan is now.

Right, and the New York Yankees haven't won a World Series with a Republican in the White House since Eisenhower was there. Therefore, Obama's election led directly to the 2009 championship.

You really need to learn to distinguish between correlation and causation.

There was no Saddam until America put him into place to wage war with Iran.

Interesting how the US put a Soviet client in power instead of, um, an American client. Man, the CIA is devious!

Wait wait wait... Saddam didn't come into power until 1979? I thought he came into power in the 60's, or was that just the Ba'ath party?

The Ba'ath party took over in 1968. Saddam himself gradually gained more and more power until he finally forced the elderly president out in 1979.

Saddam Hussein was a Soviet client who was also on close terms with France and Germany. American clients in the region included Saudi Arabia and Iran until 1979. Once the Shah was overthrown and Saddam Hussein invaded, the US and UK gave lukewarm support to Iraq starting in 1984, probably at the behest of Saudi Arabia, when Iran refused offers by Iraq to end the war.

 
At 29 January, 2010 14:16, Anonymous New Yorker said...

Pat flees yet again from the implications of gravitational acceleration, which he's afraid to address or explain.

It's already been explained.

They were reported at the scene, idiot, and some can be heard on video.

False.

Your argument failed over 8 floors, Pat, and your ego & corpulence took you down the rest of the way. You have nothing of value to say, even on your own blog. Take a tip from Lazarus and just post a word salad. It makes more sense than what you usually have to say.

Nobody cares.

 
At 29 January, 2010 14:31, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Um, right. You know what also wasn't in Afghanistan before 1979? This little thing called the Soviet Union."

So much rhetoric, so little substance.

How Jimmy Carter and I Started the Mujahideen

"You really need to learn to distinguish between correlation and causation."

You need really need to distinguish between your butterfly effect reductio ad absurdum and the very real consequences of Cold War foreign policy.

"Interesting how the US put a Soviet client in power instead of, um, an American client. Man, the CIA is devious!"

(...)

The Ba'ath party took over in 1968. Saddam himself gradually gained more and more power until he finally forced the elderly president out in 1979.

Saddam Hussein was a Soviet client who was also on close terms with France and Germany. American clients in the region included Saudi Arabia and Iran until 1979. Once the Shah was overthrown and Saddam Hussein invaded, the US and UK gave lukewarm support to Iraq starting in 1984, probably at the behest of Saudi Arabia, when Iran refused offers by Iraq to end the war."


You're full of it. Here's a long list of why:

Wikipedia page on CIA activities in Iraq

 
At 29 January, 2010 14:39, Blogger Pat said...

Oh, noes! Not gravitational acceleration!

 
At 29 January, 2010 15:08, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

Last post by "Anonymous" was me.

 
At 29 January, 2010 15:18, Anonymous Damocles said...

Alex Jones did not predict 9-11. He said that a big false flag attack was gonna happen "next year" in 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, etc. A weatherman who predicts rain every day doesn't get credit when it actually does rain. Jones and his goons also predicted that the 2004 election would be postponed, and the 2008 election, and they're saying the same thing about 2012. Although 2012 is a very popular end-of-times date among the woo-woos these days. It reminds me of the Austrian School types who claim to have predicted the financial crisis when all they do is predict the collapse of fractional reserve banking year in and year out and when a giant crisis comes long they jump up and down shouting "Told ya so!"
Krazee... I really don't know what to make of your ramblings. The point of "colonial era Europeans" is that different eras have different standards of morality.
Please stop fantasizing about Andrew Jackson. But... are you finally acknowledging that Stalin and Mao were very, very bad men?

 
At 29 January, 2010 15:51, Anonymous New Yorker said...

So much rhetoric, so little substance.

Aww, I think I hurt the little knucklehead's feelings. So the Soviets weren't in Afghanistan, Roid Rage? Even your hero Chomsky condemned the Soviet invasion.

And I still don't see any evidence that Saddam Hussein was anything but a client of the Soviet Union? Did the US consider him a buffer against Iran after Khomeini came into power? Sure. So what?

 
At 29 January, 2010 16:07, Anonymous Damocles said...

http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Security-Industry/2003/04/10/Exclusive-Saddam-key-in-early-CIA-plot/UPI-65571050017416/

It sounds like Qasim, the guy who led the coup against (Hashemite) King Faisal II of Iraq, had pro-Soviet leanings but we backed the Ba'ath party against him because Ba'ath was "reliably" anti-communist. Meaning, they would kill off domestic communists because they were subversives but flirt with the Soviet Union when it suited their interests.
Like with most dictators, ideology only matters as a means to obtaining power.

 
At 29 January, 2010 16:25, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

" Roid Rage said...
Last post by "Anonymous" was me."

I could tell, it's stupid, filled with lies and propagannda.

"Counterpunch"???????

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA!!!!!!

 
At 29 January, 2010 18:15, Anonymous Guanoroo said...

I know if I say the words "gravitational" or "physics" that means I know what I'm talking about and 9/11 is an inside job. Take that, dumbunkers!

 
At 29 January, 2010 19:26, Anonymous Marc said...

The Afghan Mujahideen were Afgan refugees who had fled into Pakistan. The CIA trained and equipped them. Bin Laden and the other Arab fighters usually worked independantly from the Mujahideen. Author Steve Coll, the authority on the Soviet-Afghan War and bin Laden, said that the CIA did try to reach out to bin Laden. However, bin Laden made it clear that he wanted nothing to do with the CIA or the United States. So the idea that the CIA somehow created Al Qaeda or the situation in Afghanistan is painfully wrong.

Saddam Hussein was a Soviet asset, but he was also a French asset, German asset and was happy to take money/aid from just about anyone. Since the Soviets had their fingers in Iraq it was standard Cold War operations to get our fingers in there too. He started the war with Iran on his own, but we were not exactly unhappy about his actions either. Anybody who thinks that Saddam was somehow under any US influence should talk to a former (surviving) member of the USS Stark.

Then with Iraq, Iraq was like a Home Depot for middle eastern terrorist groups. They offered training and safe haven for a few international Islamic terror suspects, the most famous being Abu Nidal, who was executed/assassinated by the Iraqi government prior to the US invasion in 2003. While there has been no serious link between Al Qaeda and Saddam's government (probably because they had offered their services to Saudi Arabia to kill Saddam), it would not be suprising to find that there was some level of contact between AQ operatives and the Iraqi Secret Police.

Al Qaeda in Iraq is not Al Qaeda, any more than the Raider Nation are the Oakland Raiders. The Raider Nation is much more dangerous, as was AQI. The fact is that any group of idiots who have a black bedsheet and gold paint can call themselves an Al Qaeda cell. The AQ leadership might even cheer them on, but this would be like confusing a KISS tribute band with the real thing. Had the United States decided to intervene in Darfur (a feel-good type of war) you can bet that Al Qaeda would have shown up there too. That is just how they respond.They're assholes.

As for "Explosions" being heard during the collapse of the towers...are you fucking kidding me?

 
At 30 January, 2010 09:35, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

Sorry Sword Boy,but the point is:Mao and Stalin got nothing on the English or the Spanish when it comes to slaughters and depredations.Cultural relativity and contextual caveats hardly alters the equation.To single out an ideology is to reveal yourself as a peasant totally owned by the Propaganda Masters on their Mighty Wurlitzer.You just like to highlight Mao and Stalin because they were Socialists and you are an ideologue.History is replete with Fascist and mass murdering leaders from way before Karl Marx was even born.You could argue that the appeal and rise of Marxist Socialism is directly attributable to the depredations of unbridled Capitalism.

 
At 30 January, 2010 09:56, Anonymous New Yorker said...

Why am I not surprised that Spacebar Guy's command of history is about as strong as his command of the English language.

Fascism did not exist before Marx. It appeared in the 20th Century. King Louis XIV (that's fourteenth, not "ziv") was not a fascist.

The Spanish conquistadors were not "capitalists" (I think you were trying to make this argument).

Brutalities committed by English and Spanish imperialists does not change the fact that Stalin and Mao's death tolls are in the tens of millions.

One thing I will agree with:

You could argue that the appeal and rise of Marxist Socialism is directly attributable to the depredations of unbridled Capitalism.

Sure. It then failed because its promises were elusive and the capitalist world adapted by creating the welfare state. Marxism was utterly unable to keep up with the standards of living of liberal capitalist states (East Germany vs. West Germany) and it resorted to shooting people who tried to make their way over to said liberal capitalist states (Berlin Wall).

 
At 30 January, 2010 10:08, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

"Brutalities committed by English and Spanish Imperialists does not change the fact that Stalin and Mao's death tolls are in the millions".Gee,at least you understood everything but the explanation.Jack Pumpkinhead!

 
At 30 January, 2010 10:08, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Brutalities committed by English and Spanish imperialists does not change the fact that Stalin and Mao's death tolls are in the tens of millions."

Actually, the margin of error in estimating the number of peole murderd by reactionary communism over the course of the 20th century is larger than the entire Nazi Holocaust.

 
At 30 January, 2010 10:10, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Arhoolie said...
Sorry Sword Boy,but the point is:Mao and Stalin got nothing on the English or the Spanish when it comes to slaughters and depredations."

Teh Black Hole of Stupidity™ pipes up and, once again, exposes his abysmal ignorance.

WTG, Krazee, you just keep on showing the world how fucking ignorant Twoooofers really are.

 
At 30 January, 2010 12:37, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

PornBoy illustrates neatly his warped and highly compromised understanding of the history of the Western Hemisphere and then brags about it! These explosions are no longer intermittent,jackoff.What kind of cocktails are you OD'ing on down there? Only a completely addled moron could deny the obvious.Mr.PornBoy:"Tear down that King Leopold statue.NOW"!!!

 
At 30 January, 2010 14:29, Anonymous KrazeesBiggestFan said...

I'm sure Krazee thinks that the Berlin Wall was built to keep the West Germans from migrating en masse to the workers paradise in the East.

 
At 30 January, 2010 14:48, Anonymous Shart Roberts said...

The signal to noise ration is really getting ridiculous, in terms of the actual thread topics. We really should stick to discussing the causes and implications of the gravitational acceleration that occurred during the "collapse" of Building 7. I having nothing on this in my special Binder of Non-Answers, and I was wondering if you fellow researches could help me... Troy? Lazarus?

 
At 30 January, 2010 14:59, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

Current Western surveillance dwarfs the Stasi's capabilities by a billionfold.

Yet the threat doesn't match the Herculean measures at all.

 
At 30 January, 2010 15:19, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

" We really should stick to discussing the causes and implications of the gravitational acceleration that occurred during the "collapse" of Building 7."

Nobody cares. Krazee.

 
At 30 January, 2010 15:20, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Roid Rage said...
Current Western surveillance dwarfs the Stasi's capabilities by a billionfold.

Yet the threat doesn't match the Herculean measures at all."

Could someone translate that into Sane for me?

Thank you.

 
At 30 January, 2010 15:21, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

Marc, why are you still on about that Saddam was a Soviet asset crap?

What part of:

Wikipedia page on CIA activities in Iraq

...don't you get? Notice how Saddam was used and sponsored by the CIA? So what if he did business with the Russians..although you aren't very specific in your sourcing, that could very well be. But given Saddam's history of anti-left wing activities in Iraq, and the plethora of CIA jobs he was involved in, how can you still call him a 'Soviet asset'?

What dishonest nonsense. You people are conspiracy theorists cut from a different cloth: you see communist/socialist conspiracies everywhere. How many cold war intelligence analysts and military types visit this blog and comment on it?

I detect an obsession with the Soviet Union here.

Saddam is a monster created by the US intelligence. So are the Taliban and Al Qaeda, both offshoots of the Mujahideen.

And what is this about Abu Nidal? You cite him as an example of Iraqi terrorist sheltering. Can't you do any better? He was shot and killed by the Iraqis on suspicion of aiding the Americans. He was not Al Qaeda. Sure there were terrorists in Iraq, just like there are terrorists in Ireland.

Is this the best revisionist crap you've got on sale? Frankly, it's embarrassing, like most other ultra-nationalist alternative realities manifested here on the spot.

Most I see on this thread is the product of what appears to be extreme right wing revisionist brainwashing through questionable books by dubious ex-CIA operatives with a penchant for self-aggrandizing and hollow hawkish cold war rhetoric and propaganda. Make the facts fit the convictions, boys. Iraqi WMD redux: the end justifies the lies.

Frank Wisner would be proud.

 
At 30 January, 2010 15:26, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

"Could someone translate that into Sane for me?

Thank you."

Says the man whose alias literally implies he's a motherfucker.

And unlike me, you've named yourself!

We'll do a fundraiser to give you a brain transplant, Dorothy.

 
At 30 January, 2010 15:39, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

I understand though: the fact that Saddam was largely a CIA creation bothers the ultra-nationalists to the point a personality splits off that makes believe Saddam was a 'Soviet asset' instead.

All is well again, and the flagsucking inner child is comforted. It's very similar to religion: e.g. dinosaur bones don't disprove the bible, they prove that god is testing our 'faith'. That sort of thing. Zig-zag and dodge all the way to bank.

Given that you hodge-podge bunch of flunked pseudo-historians can't even get your Iraqi history straight, it shouldn't be at all surprising that unwelcome facts about 9/11 cause total meltdown in the heads of the nationalist cult.

Embarrassing.

 
At 30 January, 2010 15:52, Anonymous Damocles said...

I detect an obsession with the Soviet Union here.
Does "The Cold War" mean anything to you? Most if not all of our meddling was done to counter Soviet influence. One cannot discuss 20th century history without talking about the Soviets.
Soviet plots were real. You don't have to be a John Bircher to realize that.
Of course, American plots were real too (and still are). And there are plenty of paranoids who see Soviet plots where there really were none, just as there are paranoids today attributing earthquakes to secret US weapons.
It does not make one a right-wing extremist to criticize the Soviets, or point out their meddling. I don't understand why you keep throwing "ultra-nationalist" and similar epithets around(except in one person's case, and I think we both know who that is).
Saddam was willing to take money from anyone. His army consisted of Soviet tanks. He crushed domestic communists though, and was more than happy to do our dirty work. I see more evidence that he was a CIA asset than a Soviet one, but it's just as possible that he was playing both sides.

 
At 30 January, 2010 16:01, Anonymous Damocles said...

I understand though: the fact that Saddam was largely a CIA creation bothers the ultra-nationalists
You don't really think people who backed every other thug in the southern hemisphere would be bothered by just one more? You attribute moral thinking to where it doesn't exist.
I think the term "creation" is an exaggeration. We may have enabled him in some ways but we certainly didn't create him any more that we created the Saudi Royals or the Shah. These were all creations of their own cultures enabled and backed by outside powers. And again, we weren't the ones who gave Saddam the 5th largest army in the world consisting primarily of Soviet tanks.
And I just noticed the comment you made about the STASI. While out technological capability today might exceed theirs, this is a function of technological development. They were working with the technology of their time, and we with that of ours. They had one agent per every 166 people, and one civilian informant for every six; do you really think we're that bad (yet) ?

 
At 30 January, 2010 16:04, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

I can live with that, Damocles.

 
At 30 January, 2010 16:13, Anonymous New Yorker said...

Saddam is a monster created by the US intelligence. So are the Taliban and Al Qaeda, both offshoots of the Mujahideen.

False. Saddam Hussein had the support of the Soviet Union (his enemy in Iran, the Shah, had American support). the Taliban is a creation of the Pakistani ISI.

Most I see on this thread is the product of what appears to be extreme right wing revisionist brainwashing through questionable books by dubious ex-CIA operatives with a penchant for self-aggrandizing and hollow hawkish cold war rhetoric and propaganda. Make the facts fit the convictions, boys. Iraqi WMD redux: the end justifies the lies.

Please see a psychiatrist.

 
At 30 January, 2010 16:18, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

" Roid Rage said...
I understand though: the fact that Saddam was largely a CIA creation bothers the ultra-nationalists to the point a personality splits off that makes believe Saddam was a 'Soviet asset' instead."

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA@!!!!!!

Oh, fuck, ladies and gents, we got us real honest to Cthulu 60s hippie!!!!

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAA!!!!

One who actually cites 'Counter' fucking 'punch' with a straight face!!!!!

Stop it, my stomach hurts from laughing at you.

 
At 30 January, 2010 16:19, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Please see a psychiatrist."

Dittoes.

 
At 30 January, 2010 16:21, Anonymous New Yorker said...

It does not make one a right-wing extremist to criticize the Soviets, or point out their meddling. I don't understand why you keep throwing "ultra-nationalist" and similar epithets around(except in one person's case, and I think we both know who that is).

He throws it around because he's some 17-year-old who just finished reading a few of Chomsky's works and he wants a rhetorical brawl. He has yet to understand that there's nuance to international politics and history.

I think the term "creation" is an exaggeration. We may have enabled him in some ways but we certainly didn't create him any more that we created the Saudi Royals or the Shah.

There's definitely a condescending paternalism going on there, where brown-skinned people are incapable of creating their own political movements or revolutions without it all being an act of puppetry from the west. This is absurd, of course.

I bet you dollars to doughnuts that Roid Rage would deny that the Viet Cong, or the Sandanistas, or MPLA in Angola were "created" by the Soviet Union, and he'd be right. But if his standard of "creation" is having anything less than hostile relations with the country, or selling weapons to the country, then of course the Soviets created the Maurice Bishop government in Grenada.

 
At 30 January, 2010 16:22, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The extent to which Saddam is a CIA creation can be determined by how his career was enhanced and propelled by the CIA.

Saddam the armed assassin. Saddam the coup planner. Saddam the ruler. Saddam the communist exterminator. Saddam, Iran's arch enemy. Who played a key role in all of that?

Then... he thought he was bigger than his puppeteers and he invaded Kuwait for (primarily) oil. Puppeteer Bush intervened and cooked up a little incubator baby hoax to rally public opinion. Like his son would cook up a WMD hoax about twelve years later.

Saddam was a monster, and I'm glad he's gone. But what if they'd never sponsored this thug in the first place? Can his creation be justified by geostrategic considerations, while at the same time totally black holing this unsavory historical fact when toppling him for other puppets?

 
At 30 January, 2010 16:29, Anonymous New Yorker said...

Saddam the armed assassin. Saddam the coup planner. Saddam the ruler. Saddam the communist exterminator. Saddam, Iran's arch enemy. Who played a key role in all of that?

A lot of people, particularly the Ba'ath Party in Iraq. I'd say the Soviets, with their billions in arms sold to him, had the most to do with his power and international aggression, with France coming 2nd place.

Then... he thought he was bigger than his puppeteers and he invaded Kuwait for (primarily) oil. Puppeteer Bush intervened and cooked up a little incubator baby hoax to rally public opinion. Like his son would cook up a WMD hoax about twelve years later.

This is just insane. The US ejected Iraq from Kuwait with UN authorization, not because of the baby incubator story, but because Iraq had extinguished a member UN state. There is no comparison between the 1991 war, which was ended as soon as the UN authorized goals had been achieved, and the 2003 war.

Saddam was a monster, and I'm glad he's gone. But what if they'd never sponsored this thug in the first place? Can his creation be justified by geostrategic considerations, while at the same time totally black holing this unsavory historical fact when toppling him for other puppets?

What the fuck are you babbling about?

 
At 30 January, 2010 16:32, Anonymous New Yorker said...

Roid Rage is actually pretty amusing. Is there any evidence whatsoever that he's actually a "truther", or did he just assume (because he doesn't know any better) that anyone who rejects the 9/11 "truth" nonsense is some hardcore conservative?

Why is he here rattling off a bunch of grievances that could have been lifted directly from a book by Naomi Klein? What the hell does Saddam Hussein have to do with 9/11 "truth" conspiracies?

 
At 30 January, 2010 16:32, Anonymous Kissinger said...

Can his creation be justified by geostrategic considerations,

 
At 30 January, 2010 16:33, Anonymous Kissinger said...

Can his creation be justified by geostrategic considerations,
Yes.

 
At 30 January, 2010 16:40, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

Last "anonymous" was me.

One who actually cites 'Counter' fucking 'punch' with a straight face!!!!!

Stop it, my stomach hurts from laughing at you.


Did you miss the fact that Counterpunch merely published a segment of an interview with Brzezinski by Le Nouvel Observateur, a French mainstream newsmagazine?

That Brzezinki's claims are corroborated by current Secretary of Defense Robert Gates?

Brzezinski is so proud of it he brags about in multiple interviews. Here's Wikipedia citing the same interview, btw.

If you like, I can point to video of Brzezinski telling it to your face. Is that going to be quite sufficient to cure you from compulsive extreme right wing denial, you drooling trailer park mullet? Does it perhaps help you that it happened under a democrat, shit stain?

You're really the poster child for stupidity on this blog, Dorothy. How embarrassing.

 
At 30 January, 2010 16:44, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Anonymous said...
The extent to which Saddam is a CIA creation can be determined by how his career was enhanced and propelled by the CIA."

It wasn't.

"Saddam the armed assassin. Saddam the coup planner. Saddam the ruler. Saddam the communist exterminator. Saddam, Iran's arch enemy. Who played a key role in all of that?"

Saddam.

That wascally wabbit.

"Then... he thought he was bigger than his puppeteers and he invaded Kuwait for (primarily) oil. "

What "puppeteers"?

"Puppeteer Bush intervened"

Oh.

The Bushes. Is there anything they can't do?

"and cooked up a little incubator baby hoax to rally public opinion."

That was not Bush, moron.


"Like his son would cook up a WMD hoax about twelve years later."

Just like Russian Intelligence, French Intelligence, British Intelligence.....

Just like the Democratic leadership of the Senate, the Democratic leadership of the House.....

Is there any moronic, shit covered lie that you won't swollow whole?

"Saddam was a monster, and I'm glad he's gone."

Liar, You got his poster on your ceiling and play "Yankee-My-Wankee" while staring at it as you drift off to sleep.

"But what if they'd never sponsored this thug in the first place?"

Who is the "they", Kemosabe?

"Can his creation be justified by geostrategic considerations,"

Did "they" create him?


"while at the same time totally black holing this unsavory historical fact"

Ummmm......link please. And Counter fucking punch doesn't count.

"when toppling him for other puppets?"


New puppets? created by "them"?

Who's the "Them"? The Illuminati? The Mason's? The Fed?


The (dare we say it) the.......JOOOOOOOOOSSSSSSS!!!!!!

 
At 30 January, 2010 16:46, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"What the hell does Saddam Hussein have to do with 9/11 "truth" conspiracies?"

Them.

 
At 30 January, 2010 16:49, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

What did I tell you?

He actually takes "Counter" fucking "punch" seriously.

HAHAHAHAHAHAAAA!!!!!!!

Oh, it's great to hear from the hippy-dippy weatherman.

"Counter" fucking "punch"

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA!!!!!!

 
At 30 January, 2010 16:53, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Zbigniew Brzezinski"

OMFG!!!!!

Zbigniew fucking Brzezinski.

Jimmy "The Peanut" Carter's fucking National Secutity Advisor?

Oh sweet jeebus on a pogo stick, this clown just keeps getting better and better.

Well, better in the "my goodness, how can somebody be so stupid as to believe Zbigniew Brzezinski" category.

 
At 30 January, 2010 17:06, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

Breathe, inbred ape man, breathe. Your only exasperating your meltdown.

"Well, better in the "my goodness, how can somebody be so stupid as to believe Zbigniew Brzezinski" category."

Which is why it's cross-corroborated by Gates. Pay attention, grasshopper. Read. Can you read, Bubba three-thumbs? Or did your reading-for-comprehension-genes get mangled up while you were conceiving yourself in the land of Oz?

Of course, now that your slow-ass realizes that it wasn't Counterpunch (which you detest because of your political persuasion, probably) but Le Nouvel Observateur, you're back peddling.

Now Brzezinski is lying! =) Why would he make it up? Why would Gates confirm it? Aren't you a Gates fanboy? He was appointed by Dubya, remember?

Desperate. The steam is coming out of your ears, Dorothy.

 
At 30 January, 2010 17:08, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

The nutter believes "Counter" fucking "punch".

The nutter believes Zbigniew fucking Brzezinski.

Damn.

Just....damn.

 
At 30 January, 2010 17:18, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

Squirm, you treasonous worm! Ha ha ha. Try to wiggle out of it.

Is Robert Gates lying too?

Answer the fucking question, Bubba.

 
At 30 January, 2010 17:55, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Roid Rage said...
Squirm, you treasonous worm! Ha ha ha."

TYhe vein in your forehead is throbbing, fucktard.

HAHAHAHAHAAAA!!!!!

Zbigniew Brzezinski, indeed.

 
At 30 January, 2010 18:04, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

"TYhe vein in your forehead is throbbing, fucktard.

HAHAHAHAHAAAA!!!!!

Zbigniew Brzezinski, indeed."


Answer the question. You can't answer my question about Gates, because he's one of your kookloon ultra-nationalist heroes. Heh.

Sorryass. Keep dodging and further sinking your own boat there, Dorothy!

Was Gates lying too? (As if Brzezinski was lying, but anyway, lol)

Answer the question, shitbeard trailer park trash filth. LOL. (I'm loving this. Keep squirming)

 
At 30 January, 2010 18:31, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Answer the question, shitbeard trailer park trash filth. LOL. (I'm loving this. Keep squirming)"

HAHAHAHAHAHAAAA!!!!!!

Me, squirming?

You're the retard who thinks Zbigniew Brzezinski is a credible source.

Zbigniew fucking Brzezinski.

Give me a break.

 
At 30 January, 2010 18:45, Anonymous New Yorker said...

You can't answer my question about Gates, because he's one of your kookloon ultra-nationalist heroes.

Robert Gates is one of your boogeymen too? I dunno, he seems like a pretty reasonable guy, which is why the Obama administration kept him on. He may actually move to end the ban on homosexuals in the military soon.

 
At 30 January, 2010 19:39, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

Robert Gates is one of your boogeymen too?

Iran-Contra....

 
At 31 January, 2010 05:25, Anonymous sackcloth and ashes said...

'There was no Saddam until America put him into place to wage war with Iran.'

The Baathists seized power in Iraq in July 1968. Iraq invaded Iran in September 1980.

Why do truthers fuck up when it comes to basic facts?

 
At 31 January, 2010 07:57, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Why do truthers fuck up when it comes to basic facts?"

Because they're insane, inbred, mouth breathing conspiracy fucktards?

 
At 31 January, 2010 13:34, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

Honestly,it's a gas watching nutjob PornBoy get his ass handed to him so thoroughly.If there is a dumber Republican whackjob on the continent let us know."I dunno,Gates seems like a reasonable guy".If New Yorker knew anything past last Wednesday he'd be equipped to understand what a scary antique the totally unhinged,Bill Casey muppet PornBoy actually is.And can someone,anyone,inform Mr.Half-Arsed that the Kennedy Administration was funding the Baathist Party back in the early '60's.Saddam played all angles,he was a wily operator.The CIA used to give him the list of key Communists to assassinate.

 
At 31 January, 2010 13:36, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

PornBoy's Paradigm:"When having bunghole widened,go to all Caps and shriek!!!!"

 
At 31 January, 2010 15:40, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Arhoolie said...
PornBoy's Paradigm:"When having bunghole widened,go to all Caps and shriek!!!!""

assholio is talking to the voices in his head again.

srsly. who the FUCK is this "pornboy" you keep talking to in your paranoid fantasist delusions?

 
At 31 January, 2010 18:17, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

Get a load of PornBoy pretending he doesn't know who's butt is being nailed to the coffee table every day of every week.What a crazed fool this crackpot turns out to be!

 
At 31 January, 2010 18:56, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Arhoolie said...
Get a load of PornBoy pretending he doesn't know who's butt is being nailed to the coffee table every day of every week.What a crazed fool this crackpot turns out to be!"

assholio, still talking to the voices.

Dude, seriously, seek professional help.


Nothing you post makes any sense at all.

 
At 01 February, 2010 03:20, Anonymous sackcloth and ashes said...

'And can someone,anyone,inform Mr.Half-Arsed that the Kennedy Administration was funding the Baathist Party back in the early '60's.Saddam played all angles,he was a wily operator.The CIA used to give him the list of key Communists to assassinate.'

Funny how none of that actually appears in any of Saddam's biographies.

 
At 01 February, 2010 07:42, Anonymous Anonymous said...

ok, wheres the debunking of kurt haskell and the well dressed man helping the christmas day underwear bomber? come on, for days i've begging you to debunk this, you geniuses spoofed it once with you zz top pics but nothing since. come on why won't you touch it? heres some links to help the smart guys started:

news article 1




abc news, its the last few sentences that are key

debunk away tiger:) i suspect, as usual, there'll be little to no debunking, maybe some personal insults if we're lucky:)

 
At 01 February, 2010 08:38, Anonymous New Yorker said...

ok, wheres the debunking of kurt haskell and the well dressed man helping the christmas day underwear bomber? come on, for days i've begging you to debunk this, you geniuses spoofed it once with you zz top pics but nothing since. come on why won't you touch it? heres some links to help the smart guys started:

What is there to debunk? What insider conspiracy do you see in either of those articles? Just like with WTC 7, I'm going to need some help here because my mind simply doesn't function in the same deranged way it does for "truthers".

 
At 01 February, 2010 10:50, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

Yes NY,er,you really are going to be needing some help these next few years.That's a good sign,though,that you are well into Step 1 of the developmental process.You've admitted you just don't know.That's OK.Now,you can google/youtube all the exposes that MSNBC and Keith Olbermann (hardly an anti-American radical!) did on the infiltrators and provocateurs that characterized the first 10 "cells" that they "rolled up".Gee,there's always some demonstrable connection beteween these Muslim "evildoers" and various Western intelligence operations,notably our own.Why is that,young man? Take it brother,may it serve you well.

 
At 02 February, 2010 05:15, Anonymous sackcloth and ashes said...

'Yes NY,er,you really are going to be needing some help these next few years.That's a good sign,though,that you are well into Step 1 of the developmental process.You've admitted you just don't know.That's OK.Now,you can google/youtube all the exposes that MSNBC and Keith Olbermann (hardly an anti-American radical!) did on the infiltrators and provocateurs that characterized the first 10 "cells" that they "rolled up".Gee,there's always some demonstrable connection beteween these Muslim "evildoers" and various Western intelligence operations,notably our own.Why is that,young man? Take it brother,may it serve you well.'

And if you get yourself addicted to crank (as Arseholie has done), that helps as well.

 
At 02 February, 2010 12:03, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

The usual crashing silence when asked about provocateurs and their uncanny ability to be everywhere you look.You boys are truly hopeless.

 
At 02 February, 2010 12:10, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

There goes PornBoy again!! It's always Y-O-U bringing up Jews.But then again,you're the one who said earlier in this thread that the incubator baby hoax wasn't Bush.You're right,it was Hill and Knowlton working on a contract handed out by Poppy.You're crazy,Chief,and a weirdly obvious liar.

 
At 02 February, 2010 14:52, Anonymous sackcloth and ashes said...

'The usual crashing silence when asked about provocateurs and their uncanny ability to be everywhere you look.'

Drug abuse does tend to make people paranoid.

Oh look, Walt! There's an NWO agent hiding behind that curtain! He's taking pictures of you every time you masturbate!

 
At 02 February, 2010 16:16, Anonymous S. Jensen said...

"Gee,there's always some demonstrable connection beteween these Muslim "evildoers" and various Western intelligence operations,notably our own.Why is that,young man?"

Because you can't clean the outhouse without getting some shit on your hands.

Walt's foreign policy team:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kiaLOzP1lCA

 
At 02 February, 2010 16:42, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

Followed by the typical thundering absence of any response to PornBoy's mentally ill assertion that Poppy didn't spread disinfo to set up Gulf War #1.

 
At 02 February, 2010 16:46, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

Plus Jensenburner,I guess that "shit" you're talking about is thousands of dead innocents,and maybe your mother next time.Boy,you really opened the barn door wide with that intermittent explosion,MuppetBoy.

 
At 03 February, 2010 04:06, Anonymous sackcloth and ashes said...

'PornBoy's mentally ill assertion that Poppy didn't spread disinfo to set up Gulf War #1.'

Any guesses as to what Walt is ranting about here?

 
At 03 February, 2010 10:03, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

Kudos to "Roid Rage" for his post of Jan 30 at 15:21.It couldn't be said better.You completely crushed the ludicrous PornBoy and the blowhard "New Yorker".PornBoy the Malignant Antique has no credibility yet explodes like Old Faithful.It's great because people check out this blog and see for themselves how reactionary and fascist the whole mindset of the Debunker Cult.A Cult that has been exposed so thoroughly and often that it's a wonder they don't close shop and take some Continuing Ed. classes.

 
At 03 February, 2010 10:23, Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's great because people check out this blog and see for themselves how reactionary and fascist the whole mindset of the Debunker Cult.
I'm sure there are far more people who come here just to laugh at you Walt.
There's nothing remotely political on this site aside from "Pornboy's" posts, which are all much more coherent than your face-opening drivel. If you want to help "your side", I suggest not posting.

 
At 03 February, 2010 11:59, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

More mush from one of the wimps:"...there's nothing remotely political on this site aside from PornBoy".You know,Bozo,that might be the single most ridiculous comment ever posted on any site,anywhere.I know,it's hard to top Sackmuffin's fabricated dust theory or all the whackjobs claiming there was no explosion in #7 that trapped Jennings and Hess,but you've done it,jackoff.Wow!

 
At 03 February, 2010 14:23, Anonymous sackcloth and ashes said...

'More mush from one of the wimps:"...there's nothing remotely political on this site aside from PornBoy".You know,Bozo,that might be the single most ridiculous comment ever posted on any site,anywhere.I know,it's hard to top Sackmuffin's fabricated dust theory or all the whackjobs claiming there was no explosion in #7 that trapped Jennings and Hess,but you've done it,jackoff.Wow!'

Wow. Someone is stoned.

 
At 04 February, 2010 12:12, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

Soldier Sad Sack and his empty cloth sack of barracks knee slappers!! You've been crushed,DogBoy and you know it.Here's a clue:"They Lie"!!!

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home