Tuesday, January 26, 2010

Not All Debunking Is Created Equal



This was apparently created by a "Truther" to "debunk" CIT. But note that he completely blows the part starting about 1:10 where he claims that Flight 77 flew on a "North of Citgo" path. I do like the point that he makes about how CIT showed witnesses the impact point but avoided telling them where the light poles were located later in the video.

181 Comments:

At 26 January, 2010 14:59, Anonymous Anonymous said...

If the video is targeted at CIT supporters, then granting the north-of-Citgo point while showing that it doesn't prove anything is a smart tact.

 
At 26 January, 2010 16:10, Blogger Pat said...

I doubt it will be effective for the simple reason that there is no real sane path that the plane can take that is north of the Citgo, hits the poles and the Pentagon. Indeed, it seems more likely to be used by CIT supporters to say "even our detractors admit NOC".

 
At 26 January, 2010 18:33, Anonymous COINTELPRO_HQ said...

I love when truthers turn on each other. It's most entertaining when they accuse each other of being COINTELPRO operatives.
It's sort of like fissures within fundamentalist groups over whose "strict interpretation" of the Bible/Koran/Etc is true and who is a Godless heretic.

 
At 26 January, 2010 19:09, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Whereas the definition of a cult is that everybody blindly & religiously believes the same insane ridiculous nonsense, such as "The 9/11 Commission Report is a truthful account of what happened on 9/11", and everybody who questions the clergy is excommunicated or burned at the stake.

You like Uncle Sam's treasonous cock up your ass, don't you? That's why most of you don't get paid.

 
At 26 January, 2010 19:11, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh and by the way, the plane hit the Pentagon.

 
At 26 January, 2010 19:42, Anonymous New Yorker said...

Whereas the definition of a cult is that everybody blindly & religiously believes the same insane ridiculous nonsense, such as "The 9/11 Commission Report is a truthful account of what happened on 9/11", and everybody who questions the clergy is excommunicated or burned at the stake.

You really don't get this whole "analogy" thing, do you? First, name me one "truther" who has been persecuted by the government for speaking 9/11 "truth".

Also, everyone believes the earth is round. That doesn't make it cult-like because it's obviously true, as it is with the 9/11 commission report.

You like Uncle Sam's treasonous cock up your ass, don't you? That's why most of you don't get paid.

What is it with "truthers" and their sexual frustrations? Are they all misogynists and homophobes because they can't get laid by either women or men?

 
At 26 January, 2010 20:14, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Anonymous said...
Whereas the definition of a cult is that everybody blindly & religiously believes the same insane ridiculous nonsense"

Well there's a shot that missed the bullseye by about 7,000 miles.

The entire point of a cult is a tiny, tiny group that believes insane, rediculous nonsense.

Like the Truthers, as a matter of fact.

Because, you see, the entire subset of humankind known as "sane", the overwhelming majority that rejects twooooferism for the insane bullshit it is, cannot be construed as a "cult".

 
At 26 January, 2010 21:08, Anonymous "The Putnam Abuser" said...

Crazies critizing crazies.. blah blah blah

 
At 26 January, 2010 21:53, Anonymous KookLoonUltranationalist said...

You like Uncle Sam's treasonous cock up your ass, don't you? That's why most of you don't get paid.
Wow.
Is this 'Roid-rage Truther from the CIT post? I knew you'd be back.
Uncle Sam is a personification for the US Government. Betraying Uncle Sam is treason. Therefor, Uncle Sam can't be treasonous.
Of course I'm sure you're a "constitutionalist" who thinks that yours and yours alone is the only legitimate interpretation of The Constitution, and all other interpretations are "treasonous."
Also, people here aren't defending the 9-11 commission, they're pointing out the utter insanity in the theories proposed by people like you.
The 9-11 commission report is fair game for criticism, but not all criticism is equally legitimate. "The 9-11 commission left out the superduper-thermite used to demolish the WTC" is not legitimate criticism. Nice try, but you're the cultist.

 
At 26 January, 2010 21:58, Anonymous Anonymous said...

First, name me one "truther" who has been persecuted by the government for speaking 9/11 "truth".
No one persecutes truthers, everyone IGNORES them, the way they ignore the guy on the side of the road with a sign reading "END IS NIGH, CHRIST TO RETURN IN 2012."
That's what pisses them off, they wish they were persecuted, most of them are wanna-be dissidents, it would give meaning to their worthless lives.
But they are ignored, and nothing they do or say (short of violence) will change that.
Of course if any of them commit acts of violence, they will claim its the CIA trying to make them look crazy.

 
At 26 January, 2010 22:35, Anonymous ALES said...

Betraying Uncle Sam is treason. Therefor, Uncle Sam can't be treasonous.
What kind of twisted fascist would define treason as betrayal of the state? The state can betray the people and/or the nation and can therefor be treasonous. State-sanctioned treason is still treason you bootlicking piece of shit. Why do you think "I was just following orders" didn't cut it at Nuremberg? That's where you apologists are gonna end up.

 
At 27 January, 2010 00:34, Blogger Pat said...

Yeah, more fantasies of the gallows for a couple of bloggers. How many times can you hang us?

 
At 27 January, 2010 03:27, Anonymous Matthew said...

Treason is betrayal of the state, by definition. Which is why treason is sometimes the correct course of action, when opposing tyranny. And tyrannical is the word you're looking for for a state that oppresses its people, a state or a government cannot, by definition, be treasonous.

Anyway want to guess that our truther friend will be unable to concede the simple fact that used a word incorrectly and will continue to rage and call us fascists and come up with more and more bizarre justifications for his original mistake? It'd be symptomatic of the movement in general if he did.

 
At 27 January, 2010 04:44, Anonymous Anonymous said...

ALES, thank you.

So, SLC-ers. Please explain how senators, presidents, generals, public servants are exempt/immune from charges of treason against the United States. I smell a double standard with you McCarthyist heaps of dung, as always.

You are fascist ultra-nationalists. Your blind uncritical admiration of the state underscores why you have earned this moniker. Do you fascist lackeys wish to pass immunity laws for the president like Berlusconi did? It wouldn't surprise me one bit.

I mean, you guys are digging your own hole here, all one has to do is let you guys express your perverted views of state freely, and you will automatically expose yourself as the dictatorship-loving Hobbsian serfs that you are. No deep pass required.

By the way, as citizens of the United States, you are guilty of misprision of treason as we speak. And yes, your loyalty is to The Constitution, not the president.

The 9/11 report is a criminal cover-up. The 9/11 commissioners themselves don't even feel it reflects the truth. The only kind zealously nationalist and obtuse enough to believe in a big lie, in fact, to passionately defend it even after it being dismissed by a majority of its own authors, so as to avoid the psychological hammer blow against your statist religion...is your kind. The redneck inbred trailer park trash kind.

You don't need a brain. To march to the fascist drumbeat, your bones will suffice.

1-2 .. 1-2 .. 1-2 .. 1-2

March, redneck, march. God forbid you develop a mind of your own, and a critical view of the state. You love the state. You need the state. In fact, you are the state. Why not report to Langley and become a paid fascist prostitute instead of a hobbyist slut?

 
At 27 January, 2010 05:06, Anonymous Bikerman said...

You, Anonymous, are a fruit loop. But you are good entertainment at times I'll give you that.

 
At 27 January, 2010 06:23, Anonymous New Yorker said...

Why do you think "I was just following orders" didn't cut it at Nuremberg? That's where you apologists are gonna end up.

You know, it's been 8 1/2 years. Are we going to see any progress on this front anytime soon? All you guys ever do is post gibberish on blogs and make bad youtube videos. C'mon, get with the program! I want the treasonous bastards on the gallows!

You are fascist ultra-nationalists. Your blind uncritical admiration of the state underscores why you have earned this moniker.

As are Noam Chomsky and George Monbiot. I mean, if there's anyone who embodies "blind uncritical admiration of the state", it's Chomsky!

I mean, you guys are digging your own hole here, all one has to do is let you guys express your perverted views of state freely, and you will automatically expose yourself as the dictatorship-loving Hobbsian serfs that you are. No deep pass required.

I like "kookloon ultranationalists" better than "hobbsian serfs", although both are better than "neocon lickspittles".

By the way, as citizens of the United States, you are guilty of misprision of treason as we speak.

So when are the indictments going to be handed down? Jeez, you'd think with something so serious, you guys would be doing more than just making youtube videos and posting angry rants on blogs.

The 9/11 report is a criminal cover-up. The 9/11 commissioners themselves don't even feel it reflects the truth.

False.

The redneck inbred trailer park trash kind.

You know, someday you might attain the level of education that I and many of the other sane people here have attained. Just don't expect to get a 5 on your AP American History exam by writing about how your teacher is a fascist lickspittle and how 9/11 was an inside job.

March, redneck, march. God forbid you develop a mind of your own, and a critical view of the state.

Noam Chomsky: redneck who is uncritical of the state.

Why not report to Langley and become a paid fascist prostitute instead of a hobbyist slut?

"Fascist prostitute" is a good one too.

Anyway, I'd recommend cutting back on the 9/11 "truth" gibberish if you want that cute girl in your English class to talk to you. You just need to relax, man.

 
At 27 January, 2010 06:30, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"...a state or a government cannot, by definition, be treasonous."

Which just goes to show how effin' stoooopid Twoooofers™ really are.


"Anonymous said...
ALES, thank you.

So, SLC-ers. Please explain how senators, presidents, generals, public servants are exempt/immune from charges of treason against the United States."

Ummmmmm....they aren't. But you have to have proof, or some kind of evidence. The hallucinations of an OCD fruitcake do not count.

"I smell a double standard with you McCarthyist heaps of dung, as always."

So McCarthy, who revealed communist treason against the government of the United States was.......treasonous?

How fucked up are your neurons, anyway?

"You are fascist ultra-nationalists."

Personally, I'm a classical liberal.

Fascist ultra-nationalists are always left wingers.

See Germany, Nazi

Also see Union, Soviet.

"I mean, you guys are digging your own hole here, all one has to do is let you guys express your perverted views of state freely, and you will automatically expose yourself as the dictatorship-loving Hobbsian serfs that you are."

So, what color is the sky on your planet?

"By the way, as citizens of the United States, you are guilty of misprision of treason as we speak. And yes, your loyalty is to The Constitution, not the president."

You use words, but you don't know what they mean, I think.

"March, redneck, march. God forbid you develop a mind of your own, and a critical view of the state. You love the state. You need the state. In fact, you are the state. Why not report to Langley and become a paid fascist prostitute instead of a hobbyist slut?"

Have you ever wondered what life would be like if you had gotten enough oxygen at birth?

 
At 27 January, 2010 07:36, Anonymous John said...

"You are fascist ultra-nationalists. Your blind uncritical admiration of the state underscores why you have earned this moniker. Do you fascist lackeys wish to pass immunity laws for the president like Berlusconi did? It wouldn't surprise me one bit. "

Anonymous must be Alex Jones.

 
At 27 January, 2010 07:56, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Anonymous must be Alex Jones"

Then Alex Jones is insnae.

 
At 27 January, 2010 08:33, Anonymous Anonymous said...

As are Noam Chomsky and George Monbiot. I mean, if there's anyone who embodies "blind uncritical admiration of the state", it's Chomsky!

ROFLMAO. Monbiot? Don't care. You've gone completely loop-de-loop. Are you seriously claiming that Chomsky, a self-proclaimed anarchist, is pro-state? Your bizarro world denialisms are legend. Any more of those comical brainfarts in the pipeline, you galactically ignorant, intellectually misaligned, undereducated putz?

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Noam_Chomsky&printable=yes#Political_views

I like "kookloon ultranationalists" better than "hobbsian serfs", although both are better than "neocon lickspittles".

Thanks. It's as if as soon as I hit this ridiculous blog with its cretin fanboys, a fountain of enjoyable insults spring from pure divination.

So when are the indictments going to be handed down? Jeez, you'd think with something so serious, you guys would be doing more than just making youtube videos and posting angry rants on blogs.

Ha ha ha. There is just ice.

False.

Bare assertion fallacy.

You know, someday you might attain the level of education that I and many of the other sane people here have attained.

If you define "sane" by neverending gulps and astonishing feats of breathtaking conformist stupidity, then count me out. THAT "level of education" I wouldn't wish upon my worst enemy. It's the utter bankruptcy of the educational system that produced you. Oh the irony that you'd consider yourself an advertisement.

Noam Chomsky: redneck who is uncritical of the state.

...

"Fascist prostitute" is a good one too.

Think of the salary. Do what you love. Start earning a living with what you best. Milk that cow.

Anyway, I'd recommend cutting back on the 9/11 "truth" gibberish if you want that cute girl in your English class to talk to you. You just need to relax, man.

Are you projecting? =)

Hey shallow Hal, tell these people to relax:
http://www.nyccan.org/signatories.php

 
At 27 January, 2010 08:51, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh and by the way, if that comment about Chomsky and Monbiot was intended to be framed as an argument that not all critics of 9/11 truth are right wing extremists.... well DUH... of course not.

At issue here is the general political and moral persuasion of SLC frequenters. Blithering inbred dumbass flagsucking urukhai such as Troy Sexton, for example.

I respect Chomsky, even though he rejects 9/11 truth. And with the kind of aberrant nonsense going on in large areas of the "truth" movement, (e.g. CIT) I don't blame him.

By the way, do you know how many times Chomsky has been labeled a conspiracy theorist? The rhetoric and the McCarthyism in these cases is exactly the same as yours.

 
At 27 January, 2010 08:58, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Also, Chomsky flip-flops a little bit on the issue, did you know?

Chomsky Confronted on 9/11: Admits LIHOP is "Conceivable"

http://www.911blogger.com/node/21782

He's just afraid of the McCarthyist propaganda machine he's studied and knows like the back of his hand. He's operating within the parameters of criticism allowed by our mainstream media and left wing/right wing who's who intellectual and political circle jerk.

 
At 27 January, 2010 09:00, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Thanks. It's as if as soon as I hit this ridiculous blog with its cretin fanboys, a fountain of enjoyable insults spring from pure divination."

Naw, the sane people around here are used to sniffing out the nutbags like you.

Just chalk it up to experience.

And the sheer joy of making fucktards look like, well....fucktards.

 
At 27 January, 2010 09:02, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"He's just afraid of the McCarthyist propaganda machine he's studied and knows like the back of his hand."


There you go with that "McCarthy" craziness again.

I really wish you wouldn't use terms you don't understand.

 
At 27 January, 2010 09:12, Anonymous Anonymous said...

if it wasn't such a serious subject it would he hilarious, the funniest joke ever told, so funny you'd laugh til you were silly:) but it is serious:(.....

funny how the deaths at gitmo prove without a doubt that our government is more than capable of pulling off a conspiracy by a large number people all telling the same lie, while the msm ignores and ridicules the few whistle blowers.

cause you know if the "left wing" and "liberal" media ever got a hold of the idea that president bush and co had knowingly covered up the deaths of innocent people they would go crazy with it! right?

the truth is that left and right are just an outdated paradigm that the haves' use to keep the have nots preoccupied with things that don't matter.

the truth is that the gitmo murders are just like 9/11 in the sense that both have very compeling evidence the actual series of events that occured are nothing like the official narrative endorsed by governmental authority and the msm finds the truth so horrific it's higher ups can't let the truth get too much traction.

 
At 27 January, 2010 09:16, Anonymous New Yorker said...

Oh and by the way, if that comment about Chomsky and Monbiot was intended to be framed as an argument that not all critics of 9/11 truth are right wing extremists.... well DUH... of course not.

Boy, you're a sharp one, aren't you?

At issue here is the general political and moral persuasion of SLC frequenters. Blithering inbred dumbass flagsucking urukhai such as Troy Sexton, for example.

I'm not Troy, in case you can't figure that out. How about dealing with the question of 9/11 and utter lack of any evidence for an "inside job"? You still haven't provided a single shred of evidence. You've just been babbling about "fascists".

I respect Chomsky, even though he rejects 9/11 truth. And with the kind of aberrant nonsense going on in large areas of the "truth" movement, (e.g. CIT) I don't blame him.

He's right to reject 9/11 "truth" because there isn't a shred of evidence for it and there isn't a single person in the "movement" who isn't a insane, ignorant, or a con artist.

Also, Chomsky flip-flops a little bit on the issue, did you know?

Chomsky Confronted on 9/11: Admits LIHOP is "Conceivable"


That's the best you can do? Jesus, those are mighty thin straws you're grasping at.

He's just afraid of the McCarthyist propaganda machine he's studied and knows like the back of his hand. He's operating within the parameters of criticism allowed by our mainstream media and left wing/right wing who's who intellectual and political circle jerk.

Right, because that's been his MO for the last 40+ years: operating within the parameters set by the mainstream media. Boy, it must really sting you to be a fanboy of Chomsky and to realize he thinks your little cult is a joke, huh?

 
At 27 January, 2010 09:22, Anonymous New Yorker said...

Let me see if I have this straight: you're using media stories of a government cover-up at Gimto to prove....that the media doesn't report on government cover-ups. Hmm, you might want to re-think that whole bit.

Also, the government has proven excellent at covering scandals. That's why the terms "Watergate", "Iran-Contra", and "Lewisnky" have no meaning in the public discourse.

And I'm still waiting for some evidence that 9/11 was an inside job. Babbling about "haves and have nots" or "left-right paradigm" like an idiotic freshman poly-sci major isn't going to cut it. Nor is talking about yet another failed attempt by the government to cover up a scandal.

 
At 27 January, 2010 09:47, Blogger Triterope said...

the msm finds the truth so horrific it's higher ups can't let the truth get too much traction.

You obviously have no clue what you're talking about.

The complete suppression of a news story would require the collaboration of countless people, since there are countless media outlets and countless people with editorial authority. And even if that weren't the case, there's the Internet and non-American media.

Clearly, you have bought into the Alex Jones fantasy that there's some all-powerful all-knowing unseen "they" that can do anything they want. Reality doesn't work like that, skippy. Come back to it.

 
At 27 January, 2010 09:59, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Personally, I'm a classical liberal.

No, you're a pseudoskeptic hatemongering nutball denialist.

Fascist ultra-nationalists are always left wingers.

See Germany, Nazi

Also see Union, Soviet.


LOL! Yeah, Germany and Russia got along real well.

Hitler and Mussolini, on the other hand, fought each other tooth and nail.

Hitler loved the left so much, that he gassed socialists and communists in concentration camps.

Yeah, Hitler was left-wing. You're a revisionist on par with Holocaust denial.

You use words, but you don't know what they mean, I think.

I can't help it that you're out of your league, but by all means, vent your frustration.

Have you ever wondered what life would be like if you had gotten enough oxygen at birth?

Are you trying to apologize for being an airhead?

"Hitler was a lefty" is about the dumbest apologetic affront to history to come across on the net. (alas frequent in brainless ultra-nationalist circles)

After all, no dictator must have committed mass murder in the name of your revolting authoritarian ideology, lest your brain melts down in frantic uncompromising waves of cognitive dissonance. Mussolini and Hitler were right-wing. Stalin and Mao were left-wing.

You: Orwellian revisionist drop-out.

 
At 27 January, 2010 10:02, Blogger Pat said...

Let me suggest that those who want to talk about treason should read the Constitution first; it's the only crime that's actually spelled out in the document.

 
At 27 January, 2010 10:16, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Right, because that's been his MO for the last 40+ years: operating within the parameters set by the mainstream media. Boy, it must really sting you to be a fanboy of Chomsky and to realize he thinks your little cult is a joke, huh?

There are many cults out there, including your little pseudoskeptic denialist cult, who manage to justify every single disgusting violation of the Constitution with sophistry.

I reject all cults, especially yours. It doesn't sting me that Chomsky criticizes the 9/11 truth movement, because I often agree with him. I can easily rally behind Chomsky's blowback theorizing and criticisms against American imperialism, propaganda, foreign coups d'état, criticism of the CIA in general, criticisms of capitalism, and the post-9/11 world.

Chomsky is often wrongfully accused of being an anti-American conspiracy theorist. I can sympathize. We both detest the arselicking stoogery exhibited by mentally handicapped government loyalist buffoons like yourself.

 
At 27 January, 2010 10:38, Anonymous sackcloth and ashes said...

'What is it with "truthers" and their sexual frustrations? Are they all misogynists and homophobes because they can't get laid by either women or men?'

Sounds plausible to me.

'Why do you think "I was just following orders" didn't cut it at Nuremberg? That's where you apologists are gonna end up.'

Given the (lack of) progress the 'truth movement' is making, pardon me if I don't quake in my boots.

'Please explain how senators, presidents, generals, public servants are exempt/immune from charges of treason against the United States.'

Well if they're innocent of the charge you're bringing (of orchestrating 9/11 as a false flag), I'd say that's a bit of a problem for you.

And bear this in mind, retard. The 'truth movement' is not only about smearing the powerful. I have heard you scumbags accuse lower-ranking military personnel and law enforcement officials, first responders, air traffic controllers, witnesses, victims (in the form of Jon Gold's claim that the UA93 passengers were part of the 'false flag' attack) and even figures on the sidelines such as Mark Loiseaux and the guys who refurbished the lifts in the WTC towers of being complicit in an act of mass murder. These are ordinary Joes and Jos who work for a living, and you're accusing them of being butchers. What kind of wankers are you?

'I smell a double standard with you McCarthyist heaps of dung, as always.'

You are the McCarthyites here. You are the ones who follow Tail Gunner Joe's tactic of throwing enough mud in the hope that it sticks, and of making baseless allegations without checking that there's any substance behind them. So FOAD.

 
At 27 January, 2010 10:50, Anonymous Anonymous said...

(in the form of Jon Gold's claim that the UA93 passengers were part of the 'false flag' attack)

Source your claim about Jon Gold, happy lamp.

 
At 27 January, 2010 11:02, Blogger Dave Kyte said...

Oh and by the way, the plane hit the Pentagon.


That is what they want you sheeple to believe.

 
At 27 January, 2010 11:07, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Do we have a convert?

BTW:

sackcloth and ashes, if you don't prove your ridiculous claim about Jon Gold with a quote and a working link, you are a lying sack(cloth) of shit.

10 to 1 on the latter.

 
At 27 January, 2010 11:11, Anonymous Bikerman said...

Source your claim about Jon Gold, happy lamp.

How about you ESAD. Jerk-off.

 
At 27 January, 2010 11:13, Blogger Dave Kyte said...

Yeah, and the creationist call evolutionist a cult. Never mind the fact the consensus of the brightest and best in the field hold evolution as true and only people with a fundamentalist idea think it's wrong.

WOW, sounds familiar, the best engineers and scientist along with the smarter level of society believing one thing based on fact and logic.... while a very small faction of less than bright gullible rubes conned into a silly conspiracy theory by failed professors, theologians and third rate experts believe another.

 
At 27 January, 2010 11:14, Anonymous New Yorker said...

There are many cults out there, including your little pseudoskeptic denialist cult, who manage to justify every single disgusting violation of the Constitution with sophistry.

Um, can you please get to the point where you present some evidence that 9/11 was an inside job? Noam and I are getting bored of reading your pseudo-profundity.

It doesn't sting me that Chomsky criticizes the 9/11 truth movement, because I often agree with him.

Whatever you say....

I can easily rally behind Chomsky's blowback theorizing and criticisms against American imperialism, propaganda, foreign coups d'état, criticism of the CIA in general, criticisms of capitalism, and the post-9/11 world.

That's nice. At some point, however, you're going to have to come to terms with the fact that Chomsky thinks 9/11 "truth" is utter nonsense. Deal with it.

Chomsky is often wrongfully accused of being an anti-American conspiracy theorist. I can sympathize. We both detest the arselicking stoogery exhibited by mentally handicapped government loyalist buffoons like yourself.

Again, I know it wounds your ego to find out that Chomsky thinks 9/11 "truth" is nonsense, but you're going to have to deal with disappointments in life. Mommy and daddy should have explained this to you.

Now can you stop babbling about kookloon ultranationalists and the like and please present some evidence that 9/11 was an inside job? Hello? Bueller?

 
At 27 January, 2010 11:17, Anonymous New Yorker said...

BTW, new "anonymous", thank you for posting here. Spacebar guy is just boring, and Brian Good disappears every so often (I figure his parents dose him with thorazine while he's asleep), so it's good to have such an entertaining "truther" as yourself scolding us fascist goose-steppers.

 
At 27 January, 2010 11:23, Anonymous GuitarBill said...

Anonymous writes, "...Also, Chomsky flip-flops a little bit on the issue, did you know? Chomsky Confronted on 9/11: Admits LIHOP is 'Conceivable'."

Wrong! Here's Noam Chomsky's real opinion of the "9/11 truth movement":


"...And then they say, '...here's something I can do. I can become a qualified civil engineer in an hour, and prove that Bush blew up the World Trade Center.'

"I'm pretty sure that in Washington they must be clapping. A couple of years ago I came across a Pentagon document that was about declassification procedures. Among other things it proposed that the government should periodically declassify information about the Kennedy assassination. Let people trace whether Kennedy was killed by the mafia, so activists will go off on a wild-goose chase instead of pursuing the real problems or getting organized. It wouldn't shock me if thirty years from now we discover in the declassified records that the 911 industry was being fed by the administration."
-- Noam Chomsky, MIT professor of Linguistics.

Source: YouTube: Noam Chomsky--The Real 911 Conspiracy.

 
At 27 January, 2010 11:25, Blogger Dave Kyte said...

You don't need a brain. To march to the fascist drumbeat, your bones will suffice.

And yet by every measure of intelligence your average skeptic debunkers is far superior the conspiracy theorist types in every regard, why is that?

Why is it when you meet a truther, he is not going to be a bright professional person. NO, most of them are young inexperienced, ill educated and low IQ. The truther you meet is more likely to be the guy making the coffee at Starbucks, not a doctor, engineer or scientist.

You know, stupid people.

 
At 27 January, 2010 11:36, Anonymous Anonymous said...

There goes stupid, dumb, dumb Pat Curley, posting things just because he thinks it's a debunking.

You are relying on a teenage/twenty something drummer from the UK, you twit. He provided no formulas, no calculations, no animations. He wasn't even truthful with the entire flight path.

What bunch of nincompoops you all are.

It's handled right here:
http://s1.zetaboards.com/artists4911truth2/topic/2836572/1/

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/North-Approach-Impact-Analysis.html

 
At 27 January, 2010 11:43, Anonymous KookLoonUltranationalist said...

LOL! Yeah, Germany and Russia got along real well.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pact
This new truther is a feisty one! He sounds like a philosophy major anarchist/libertarian. It's him vs the "evil statist" bootlickers. Fascist this bla bla bla Ultranationalist that bla bla bla. If only everyone were as wise and enlightened as he, maybe we'd live in a Randian paradise.
You are fascist ultra-nationalists. Your blind uncritical admiration of the state underscores why you have earned this moniker.
I distinctly remember someone here (NYer I think) complaining about the false notion that military service is the only way to serve your country. Real fascist, that one.
I'm very curious as to where he gets "ultra-nationalist" from this blog. If Pat and James were complaining about the evil brown masses invading from the south, maybe he'd have a point. Do you know what nationalism is?
It sounds like you need to go back to Political Ideology 101. Or learn to use google.

 
At 27 January, 2010 11:47, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anon @11:36
You moron! Did you not notice the title of the post "Not All Debunking Is Created Equal"?
It sounds like Krazee but with proper use of the space bar. Did the policy to allow mentally ill patients use of the internet just kick in today?

 
At 27 January, 2010 12:34, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Personally, I'm a classical liberal.

No, you're a pseudoskeptic hatemongering nutball denialist."

No, fucktard, I'm a classical liberal.

You know, a belief in individual freedom, traditional religion, democratic (small d) government, property rights, the rule of law, free markets, laissez-faire economics and market competition.

So, yeah, you have no fucking clue what you're talking about.

"After all, no dictator must have committed mass murder in the name of your revolting authoritarian ideology, lest your brain melts down in frantic uncompromising waves of cognitive dissonance. Mussolini and Hitler were right-wing. Stalin and Mao were left-wing."

Nope. Hitler and Moose-baby were completely creatures of the left you ahistoric asshole.

Not only are you crazy, you're ignorant.

Great combo you got going there, fucktard.

"LOL! Yeah, Germany and Russia got along real well."

Bingo. Can I call 'em or can I call 'em?

HAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!!!

"Hitler and Mussolini, on the other hand, fought each other tooth and nail."

Wow. Teh Stoooopid is strong in this one.

Ah, well, since I proved my point and you're a boring idiot, I'll stop there.

Why don't you go take your meds and have a nice nap, fucktard?

 
At 27 January, 2010 12:36, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"your little pseudoskeptic denialist cult"

Lather.

Rinse.

Repeat.

 
At 27 January, 2010 12:38, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"I reject all cults, especially yours. It doesn't sting me that Chomsky criticizes the 9/11 truth movement, because I often agree with him. I can easily rally behind Chomsky's blowback theorizing and criticisms against American imperialism, propaganda, foreign coups d'état, criticism of the CIA in general, criticisms of capitalism, and the post-9/11 world."

Wow, this one I cannot up pass up?

You like......Chomsky?????????


Who the fuck takes Chumpsky serioussly except terminally insane reactionary leftists?


Foam Fuckin' Chomsky?

HAHAHAHAHAYHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA!!!!!!

 
At 27 January, 2010 13:18, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

Keep sharp objects away from PornBoy!! The guy is on a John Birch style rampage,and now he's got Noam Chomsky and Adolf Hitler manning the Left ramparts! Crikey,Goober! You're beginning to make Nico Haupt and Troy the Crankhead sound grounded.10 to 1 odds that this whackbar is a huge Bob Grant admirer.

 
At 27 January, 2010 13:39, Anonymous Anonymous said...

ROFLMAO.

Hitler and Mussolini. Creatures from the left?!

HA HA HA.

Time for a brain transplant, queerburt. This isn't worth any sort of rebuttal. You're wired incorrectly, and it can't be repaired remotely. Tip: take a bath with a radio. Tag: WONTFIX.

(OTOH, these amazingly and comical brainfarts do underscore how utterly batshit delusional you poopoo McWufflenuts really are!)

Who else would like to go on the record saying Hitler and Mussolini were "left wingers"? This should be hilarious. Welcome to wall of nazi revisionist shame! :-D

(Amazing isn't it, that Prescott Bush did business with Nazi financier Fritz Thyssen, socialist that he was. I'm sure Prescott was even a bigger socialist when he recruited and groomed Richard Nixon for the republican party...

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/sep/25/usa.secondworldwar

http://wonkette.com/263710/memorial-day-photo-fun-prescott-bush-runs-the-world)

LuLz.

 
At 27 January, 2010 13:44, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey sackcloth and ashes, you lying teabagger anti-semite, where's your source for your defamatory statements against Jon Gold? Saying he thought flight 93 passengers were "in on it"?

Right. You have none. You just invent whatever you like.

Just another day in the lala-make-believe-land of the 9/11 lie movement.

How utterly embarrassing.

 
At 27 January, 2010 13:52, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

My main man PornBoy sure is a nutjob.When you are finished sniffing Richard Perle's underpants can you please offer us something,anything on America hater Anthony Shaffer.OK,thanks Tiger.

 
At 27 January, 2010 14:28, Anonymous Anonymous said...

All the improperly used political epithets are making my head hurt.
Only in the US is "Right wing" associated with anti-collective sentiment. The fact that the NAZI's were collectivists does not make them Lefties.
In the European model, Right wingers want to maintain or restore cultural institutions IE "Loyalty to Crown and Church." In the US, we have neither Crown nor Church so that model doesn't work.
Lefties are the ones who want to destroy cultural institutions and replace them with new ones. Think Robespierre or Lenin.
"Ultranationalist" is an ethno-centric far-right ideology that wants to go back to a time before immigration or before the Atheism became the predominant belief among Europeans. The UK's BNP, France's Front National, and Italy's Lega Nord are all examples. I'd say a more extreme example of this would be the (old) National Party in South Africa.
The notion that debunkers are associated with any of the aforementioned groups is as absurd as the notion that Hitler was a Leftist.

 
At 27 January, 2010 14:31, Anonymous RooibosTea said...

Hey sackcloth and ashes, you lying teabagger-
Stop watching MSNBC. "Teabagger" is worse than "conspiracy theorist" as far as meaningless insults used to dismiss people's ideas.

 
At 27 January, 2010 14:45, Anonymous Dylan Unsavery said...

He's [Chomsky] just afraid of the McCarthyist propaganda machine he's studied and knows like the back of his hand. He's operating within the parameters of criticism allowed by our mainstream media and left wing/right wing who's who intellectual and political circle jerk.

Haha, you delusional nutter.

 
At 27 January, 2010 14:50, Anonymous Punching the elderly said...

Does one have to be affiliated with a particular party to be able to explain how WTC7 achieved over 2 seconds of gravitational acceleration during its 'collapse'? No? Then why hasn't anyone tried it? I understand why Pat Cowardly flees from the subject, as he conceded his sound defeat on the issue months ago, but what about people who say science is their 'thing', and that truthers are intellectually inferior, like Dave Kyte? Why wouldn't he go ahead and explain it, if it's so clear to him? can anyone reconcile Sunder's assertion that GA was impossible, even though the NIST report said it occurred? Whenever you're ready, kids.

 
At 27 January, 2010 14:55, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"The fact that the NAZI's were collectivists does not make them Lefties."

Does the cognitive dissonance make you head hurt?

"Lefties are the ones who want to destroy cultural institutions and replace them with new ones."

So Hitler's attempt to destroy Christianity, as just one example among thousands, fits right in.

"...that wants to go back to a time before immigration..."

Ever hear of that little incident called the Holocaust?

Nazis did that.

""Ultranationalist" is an ethno-centric far-right ideology..."

And Stalin didn't invoke "Mother Russia" after the Nazi invasion to whip up ultranationalist sentiments among the Russian population?

C'mon, dude, this is like shooting fish in a barrel.

 
At 27 January, 2010 15:33, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Does one have to be affiliated with a particular party to be able to explain how WTC7 achieved over 2 seconds of gravitational acceleration during its 'collapse'?"
So now that NIST has explained how the structural failure occurred, truthers have moved onto moaning about the speed of the collapse, which is something structural engineers don't address because it's irrelevant. Irrelevant, unless of course you're looking for flimsy "evidence" to confirm your preconceived belief that it was a controlled demolition.

 
At 27 January, 2010 15:41, Anonymous sackcloth and ashes said...

(in the form of Jon Gold's claim that the UA93 passengers were part of the 'false flag' attack)

http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2009/12/i-will-call-your-dishonest-theory-and.html

With my complements, fucker. And to quote the following:

'I'm coming to the conclusion that the passengers on Flights 93 and 77 were in on the operation. Since I know that Flight 93 landed at Cleveland, that affirms that those passengers said to have boarded Flight 93 at Newark, didn't! I believe that the voice morphing Griffin believes occurred was actually the real passengers, however those passengers were a part of the operation. In other words Flight 93 followed the Operation Northwoods scenario.'

That's Jon Gold talking. May I take a giant shit on his grave, and yours.

 
At 27 January, 2010 15:43, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Lazarus Long:

When have you last has a moment of clarity?

Hitler tried to destroy christianity? (Reliable) source me.

In a speech delivered at Koblenz, August 26, 1934 Hitler states:

"There may have been a time when even parties founded on the ecclesiastical basis were a necessity. At that time Liberalism was opposed to the Church, while Marxism was anti-religious. But that time is past. National Socialism neither opposes the Church nor is it anti-religious, but on the contrary, it stands on the ground of a real Christianity. The Church's interests cannot fail to coincide with ours alike in our fight against the symptoms of degeneracy in the world of to-day, in our fight against the Bolshevist culture, against an atheistic movement, against criminality, and in our struggle for the consciousness of a community in our national life, for the conquest of hatred and disunion between the classes, for the conquest of civil war and unrest, of strife and discord. These are not anti-Christian, these are Christian principles."

— Norman H. Baynes, ed., The Speeches of Adolf Hitler, April 1922-August 1939. Vol. 1. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1942, p. 386.

Whatever Hitler's opposition to christianity at some point in time was, it doesn't compare to his support. So...

What craptacular school did you attend, you incompetent keister? You're bullshitting aren't you? Tell me, pitch fork rider, are there any books in trailer camp land, or do you mullets just play jack-in-the-box with your niece all day?

<3

 
At 27 January, 2010 15:45, Anonymous sackcloth and ashes said...

'Hey sackcloth and ashes, you lying teabagger anti-semite,'

I am an anti-Semite?

Check out the 'Who is Payday Monsanto' thread to read my comments, and see where I'm coming from. And as for tea-bagging, you're mother loved it, so why shouldn't you? x

 
At 27 January, 2010 15:54, Blogger Dave Kyte said...

like Dave Kyte? Why wouldn't he go ahead and explain it,

We have explained it, time and time again, and there is no lack of science literature out there for you to read. I can explain it to my cat and get the same reaction I get from you.

On big problem is you personally lack the ability to understand the subject. Low of IQ? Maybe mom liked to drink when she was pregnant, maybe you abused drugs as a teen, I suspect you are what was called "Slow" or "Challenged" as a child. no matter, you just don't have what it takes. In other word you are befitting your stature in life, a loser 55 year old former janitor.

That is the entire issue in a nut shell, you like most of your brethren are that class of people who do not matter, except maybe to clean toilets. And to make fun of when you pretend you know what you are talking about.

No more "Daddy, tell me why NIST said this or that?" or "explain to my daddy" We Understand Brian, you have the mind of a child.

Now show us you are not the mental midget your suggest, and explain in the simplest terms you can muster why anything from the NIST reports implies anything close to a controlled demolition.

 
At 27 January, 2010 15:56, Anonymous Anonymous said...

No, that's not "Jon Gold talking" you giant heap of malodorous mammary dandruff. That's Dean Jackson a.k.a. "brian78046", an even greater sack of lying shit than you are.

Jon Gold thusly said no such thing, and you are thusly a fucking piece of shit liar. (Which I knew in advance, because Jon Gold would NEVER EVER say such a thing... EVER)

http://www.911blogger.com/node/22192#comment-224241



SLC: Squadron of Lying Cultists!

 
At 27 January, 2010 16:01, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hitler thought that Christianity was a Jewish invention to weaken the European warrior spirit. This comes directly from his interpretation of Nietzsche's work.
Just because he paid lip-service to The Church to consolidate his power doesn't indicate anything about his ideology. The Church and the NAZI's shared a common enemy in Bolshevism.
He wanted, in the long run, to restore a pagan warrior religion to what would become Greater Germany.
Every far-right fascist government in the world supported The Church though, Hitler was unique in this regard which is why NAZIsm isn't the same as the fascism that characterized every regime from Mussolini to Franco to Pinochet to Marcos.
But those were simpler times. Oh how I miss the Cold War :'(

 
At 27 January, 2010 16:06, Anonymous Marc said...

The Nazi Party, or National Socialist German Worker's Party was left-wing. It was an answer to the leftist Bolsheviks, who were backed by the Soviets and perceived to also be run by Jews. The Nazi Party was an answer for racists German Nationalists who liked socialism but not Jews.

In the early days of Nazi rule, German laws were changed to that all Germans had a job, healthcare, and a place to live.Goering even went was far as to perchase two luxury liners for the government so that every German, no matter what is social status, could take his family on a cruise. Between 1936 and 1940, Germany was a Socialist paradise. Austria and Czechoslovakia were willingly anexed by Germany as much as to join their successful economy as to become part of a larger Germanic state. (We could see Taiwan re-united with China for the same exact reasons). Americans such as Joseph Kennedy and Charles Lindberg were so impressed by the Third Reich that they openly lobbied for Nazi-like policies in the US.

Later on, as Hitler consolidiated power the socialist Brown-Shirts began to openly question the direction of the country. This is why they were eliminated. The Third Reich went on to become a political entity that transcended conventional definitions of "Left" or "Right" wing.

Troofer share much with Nazis. They hate Jews. This is evident not only in their use of the euphamism "Zoinists/Zionism", but it is also present in their typical arguements; such as how the media brain washes the American people, well what they really mean is that the Jewish-controlled media brainwashes people. Neo-Cons are Jewish Republicans, the phrase was defined by Hitler-apologist , Pat Buchanan. Who are their villians in the great 9/11 conspiracy? Israel/Mossad, Paul Wolfowitz,Silverstein Properties, Richard Pearle, etc...

I don't even think that Troofers are well meaning boobs anymore.

 
At 27 January, 2010 16:16, Blogger Dave Kyte said...

Remember Brian was the fool who thought all the concrete in the towers was pulverized. Never mind the fact the concrete was uses only for flooring and thereby of no structural significance. I guess Brian think they did it just for show, just to make lots of dust.

Never mind the fact that if you are informed enough you know it would take drilling holes into all that concrete, setting numerous charges on each and every floor, and timing them to explode in exact synchronization with the collapse. Sorry Brian, just setting thermite off on it or by it won't work, but you wouldn't know that. That is what it would take to pulverized all that concrete the way moron Brian say it happened.

You know it take a special kind of stupidity to think like Brian Good. Good thing he will never amount to anything in life.

 
At 27 January, 2010 16:18, Anonymous Anonymous said...

pseudo-historian:
"Hitler thought that Christianity was a Jewish invention to weaken the European warrior spirit. This comes directly from his interpretation of Nietzsche's work."

reality:
"Hitler described his supposedly divine mandate for his anti-Semitism: "Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord."

pseudo-historian:
"He wanted, in the long run, to restore a pagan warrior religion to what would become Greater Germany."

reality:
Older literature states that Hitler had no intention of instituting worship of the ancient Germanic gods in contrast to the beliefs of some other Nazi officials. In Hitler's Table Talk one can find this quote:

"It seems to me that nothing would be more foolish than to re-establish the worship of Wotan. Our old mythology ceased to be viable when Christianity implanted itself. Nothing dies unless it is moribund."


Despite of all the name-dropping and pompous self-aggrandizing "look at me I'm an expert", your "facts" are off the mark.

 
At 27 January, 2010 16:51, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You guys should trust the Truthers regarding Hitler, they probably know their Idol better than anyone else.

 
At 27 January, 2010 17:02, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anon@16:01
Replace "Hitler" with "The Nazi elites" and what you say makes more sense. However, the link between the Nazi's and the occult/paganism is overblown. It's more likely that they were just thugs that would use whatever religion or belief system was convenient to their consolidation of power.
Anon@16:18
Who/what are you quoting in your "reality" paragraphs? Are you saying that Hitler and the Nazis weren't influenced by a desire to return to pagan warrior ethics? They did plan a THOUSAND year Reich after all. Are you saying that they weren't influenced by Nietzsche, or at least Nietzsche's sister's interpretation of his works? What was the point of that giant pagan symbol on every flag and every statue throughout Germany?

 
At 27 January, 2010 17:17, Blogger Triterope said...

So Anonymous is arguing with Anonymous now?

Pat/James, would you please consider disallowing Anonymous posting? Having to figure out who's who is sucking the life out of this place.

 
At 27 January, 2010 17:27, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

Goebbels, Nazi Minister of Propaganda, noted:

"The Fuhrer is deeply religous, though completely anti-Christian. He views Christianity as a symptom of decay. Rightly so. It is a branch of the Jewish race... Both [Judaism and Christianity] have no point of contact to the animal element, and thus, in the end, they will be destroyed."

 
At 27 January, 2010 17:29, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

What the Hitler government envisioned for Germany was clearly set out in a thirty-point program for the 'National Reich Church' drawn up during the war by Rosenberg, an outspoken pagan...


"The National Reich Church of Germany categorically claims the exclusive right and the exclusive power to control all churches within the borders of the Reich: it declares these to be national churches of the German Reich.

"The National Church is determined to exterminate irrevocably...the strange and foreign Christian faiths imported into Germany in the ill-omened year 800...

"The National Church has no scribes, pastors, chaplains or priests, but National Reich orators are to speak in them.

"The National Church demands immediate cessation of the publishing and dissemination of the Bible in Germany...'"

"On the altars there must be nothing but 'Mein Kampf' (to the German nation and therefore to God the most sacred book) and to the left of the altar a sword.

"On the day of its foundation, the Christian Cross must be removed from all churches, cathedrals and chapels...and it must be superseded by the only unconquerable symbol, the swastika."

(The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, by William L. Shirer, p. 240 in some editions, p. 332 in others. Chapter headed "Triumph and Consolidation", subsection "The Persecution of the Christian Churches")

 
At 27 January, 2010 17:32, Anonymous Anonymous said...

pseudo-historian:
The Nazi Party, or National Socialist German Worker's Party was left-wing. It was an answer to the leftist Bolsheviks, who were backed by the Soviets and perceived to also be run by Jews. The Nazi Party was an answer for racists German Nationalists who liked socialism but not Jews.

reality
The "Sozialistisch" in NSDAP has no more to with "socialism" than "Demokratisch" in DDR had anything to do with "democracy". They party members fancied themselves "socialist" because of their deep rooted hatred for Jewish capital. Of course, they were in practice, despite their deceitful name, anti-communist, anti-socialist and anti-left in general.

Example:
"From the outset, the DAP was opposed to non-nationalist political movements, especially on the left, including the Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD) and the newly-formed Communist Party of Germany (KPD). Members of the DAP saw themselves as fighting against "Bolshevism" and anyone considered to be part of or aiding so-called "international Jewry"."

pseudo-historian:
In the early days of Nazi rule, German laws were changed to that all Germans had a job, healthcare, and a place to live.Goering even went was far as to perchase two luxury liners for the government so that every German, no matter what is social status, could take his family on a cruise. Between 1936 and 1940, Germany was a Socialist paradise. Austria and Czechoslovakia were willingly anexed by Germany as much as to join their successful economy as to become part of a larger Germanic state. (We could see Taiwan re-united with China for the same exact reasons). Americans such as Joseph Kennedy and Charles Lindberg were so impressed by the Third Reich that they openly lobbied for Nazi-like policies in the US.

reality:
Fictional and baseless assertions; until I start seeing sources backing up this speculative American neocon fascist exculpatory drivel, Orwellian revisionism and McCarthyist finger-pointing, probably drilled up from some fringe faux-historian hell bent on disassociating right wing nationalism with Hitler, I am unconvinced. For all I know, you could be claiming Hitler was a reptilian android with a socialist manifesto tattood on his belly. Jobs were given to Germans at the expense of Jews. I remember the slogan: "500000 Arbeitslosen, 500000 Juden". Persecuting Jews is not a "socialist paradise" you compulsive falsifier.

pseudo-historian:
Later on, as Hitler consolidiated power the socialist Brown-Shirts began to openly question the direction of the country. This is why they were eliminated. The Third Reich went on to become a political entity that transcended conventional definitions of "Left" or "Right" wing.

reality:
Nonsense. They were never really socialist nor "left-wing" to begin with. It was all about anti-semitism and nationalism. Hitler had his own plans:
"Unlike Drexler and other party members, Hitler was less interested in the "socialist" aspect of "national socialism" beyond moving Social Welfare administration from the Church to the State. Himself of provincial lower-middle-class origins, he disliked the mass working class of the big cities, and had no sympathy with the notions of attacking private property or the business class (which some early Nazis espoused). For Hitler the twin goals of the party were always German nationalist expansionism and Antisemitism. These two goals were fused in his mind by his belief that Germany's external enemies - Britain, France and the Soviet Union - were controlled by the Jews, and that Germany's future wars of national expansion would necessarily entail a war against the Jews.

 
At 27 January, 2010 17:33, Anonymous KookLoonUltranationalist said...

LL, you're seriously interfering with the ability of Leftists to blame all evils in the world on Christianity.

 
At 27 January, 2010 17:47, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"reality
The "Sozialistisch" in NSDAP has no more to with "socialism"...."


OOOO OOOO I KNOW I KNOW !!!!!!

It meant fuzzy pink bunnies and unicorns and rainbows for everyone!!!!

"They party members fancied themselves "socialist" because of their deep rooted hatred for Jewish capital."

But they weren't socialists.

Did your mother drop you on your head repeatedly when you were a baby?

"Fictional and baseless assertions; until I start seeing sources backing up this speculative American neocon fascist exculpatory drivel, Orwellian revisionism and McCarthyist finger-pointing, probably drilled up from some fringe faux-historian hell bent on disassociating right wing nationalism with Hitler, I am unconvinced."

Of course your unconvinced.

You're insnae.

"Nonsense. They were never really socialist nor "left-wing" to begin with. It was all about anti-semitism and nationalism."

And both of those things are incompatible with reactionary leftism....how?


C'mon, man, this is like a cat batting a toy mouse around.

 
At 27 January, 2010 17:50, Anonymous New Yorker said...

Does one have to be affiliated with a particular party to be able to explain how WTC7 achieved over 2 seconds of gravitational acceleration during its 'collapse'? No? Then why hasn't anyone tried it? I understand why Pat Cowardly flees from the subject, as he conceded his sound defeat on the issue months ago, but what about people who say science is their 'thing', and that truthers are intellectually inferior, like Dave Kyte? Why wouldn't he go ahead and explain it, if it's so clear to him? can anyone reconcile Sunder's assertion that GA was impossible, even though the NIST report said it occurred? Whenever you're ready, kids.

It's already been explained.

 
At 27 January, 2010 17:55, Anonymous Anonymous said...

And please, we've heard the pretty telling "anti-semitic" and Holocaust denier slurs and guilt by association fallacies over & over.....

From the mouths of paid fascist propagandist Glenn Beck and his sidekick Mike Baker, an actual former CIA operative.LOL! So pathetic, so transparent.

If you're really going there now, it means you're getting really desperate! :-D

As Jon Gold said, the Holocaust cannot be (ab)used as a get-out-of-jail free card. Neither can baseless slurs about anti-semitism. If Silverstein committed insurance fraud on three WTC buildings, he's going to see trial, like any other criminal.

NT =)

 
At 27 January, 2010 17:55, Anonymous New Yorker said...

Hitler thought that Christianity was a Jewish invention to weaken the European warrior spirit. This comes directly from his interpretation of Nietzsche's work.
Just because he paid lip-service to The Church to consolidate his power doesn't indicate anything about his ideology. The Church and the NAZI's shared a common enemy in Bolshevism.
He wanted, in the long run, to restore a pagan warrior religion to what would become Greater Germany.
Every far-right fascist government in the world supported The Church though, Hitler was unique in this regard which is why NAZIsm isn't the same as the fascism that characterized every regime from Mussolini to Franco to Pinochet to Marcos.
But those were simpler times. Oh how I miss the Cold War :'(


Bingo. National Socialism was different from the fascism of Spain, Italy, Portugal, etc. which were movements of the Catholic right (in Slovakia, they cut out the middle man and had Father Jozef Tiso as dictator). It should be noted, however, that most of the leadership of the Third Reich came from Catholic Bavaria and Austria.

 
At 27 January, 2010 17:58, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Lazarus: get yourself to the nearest AA-meeting.

"reactionary leftism"

ROFLMAO!

 
At 27 January, 2010 17:59, Blogger dgdgdf said...

http://www.bootboots.com
http://www.salelouboutin.com
http://www.buylouboutin.com
http://www.bestlouisvuitton.com
http://www.sale-mbt.com
http://www.discount-

christianlouboutin.com

Velours Scrunch

Boots
Miss

Clichy 140 boots
Robot 120 ankle boots Black Suede/ Leather Lace Up Ankle boots Tina Suede

Black Platform Boots
Circus Cutout Suede Ankle Boots Deva 120 suede

fringed Boots
Sigourney Metallc Ankle Boots

 
At 27 January, 2010 17:59, Blogger dgdgdf said...

Miss Dark Brown Miss Suede Black Arielle A Talon ankle Boots Ariella

Clou Silver Studded Boots
Alta Arielle A Talon Python Short Boots Robot 120 ankle

boots Gold
babel

shoe boots Brown
Trottinette 140 ankle boots Brown Trottinette 140 ankle boots Mouse suede Forever Tina boots Purple fringed suede C'est Moi boots

Black
C'est Moi

boots Pink
Charme 100 suede ankle boots Leopard suede boots

 
At 27 January, 2010 18:00, Blogger dgdgdf said...

Christian

Louboutin Tuba Tall Boot
Fifre Suede Ankle Boot black lace ankle boots Black Lace-Up Boots

black fold-over

boots
black leather knee-high boots peep-toe bootie Christian Louboutin Astraqueen shoe boots

platform lace-up

bootie
Christian Louboutin Suede Black Ankle boots supra fifre

120 thigh-high boots
Christian Louboutin Alta Ariella Talon Leopard

Boots
Christian Louboutin OTK PlatformAfrica grey suede Boot Christian Louboutin Alta Ariella Talon Leopard Ankle Boots Christian Louboutin black leather ankle boots Christian Louboutin dark red leather ankle boots Manolo Blahnik Something Blue Satin Pump

 
At 27 January, 2010 18:02, Anonymous Anonymous said...

How do Bots end up on a site like this? Or are Truthers just selling shoes now.

 
At 27 January, 2010 18:10, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oooh, they were so different. So when you go up North, Europe gradually becomes protestant, yes. So what? They were all right-wing ultra-nationalists, just like you lot.

Tell me, SLC: where did the Hitler salute come from?

That's 'extremely right'. LOL.

 
At 27 January, 2010 18:13, Anonymous Anonymous said...

A false flag spam attack, to create a "helpful wave of indignation", so that anonymity will be revoked, and to force through the: Pat Riot Act!

 
At 27 January, 2010 18:14, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

“The Nazis did not, as their foreign admirers contend, enforce price control within a market economy. With them price control was only one device within the frame of an all-around system of central planning. In the Nazi economy there was no question of private initiative and free enterprise. All production activities were directed by the Reichswirtschaftsministerium. No enterprise was free to deviate in the conduct of its operations from the orders issued by the government. Price control was only a device in the complex of innumerable decrees and orders regulating the minutest details of every business activity and precisely fixing every individual's tasks on the one hand and his income and standard of living on the other.

What made it difficult for many people to grasp the very nature of the Nazi economic system was the fact that the Nazis did not expropriate the entrepreneurs and capitalists openly and that they did not adopt the principle of income equality which the Bolshevists espoused in the first years of Soviet rule and discarded only later. Yet the Nazis removed the bourgeois completely from control. Those entrepreneurs who were neither Jewish nor suspect of liberal and pacifist leanings retained their positions in the economic structure. But they were virtually merely salaried civil servants bound to comply unconditionally with the orders of their superiors, the bureaucrats of the Reich and the Nazi party.”
-Ludwig von Mises


So ya see, the Nazis were actually WERE believers in traditional religion, democratic (small d) government, property rights, the rule of law, free markets, laissez-faire economics and market competition.

Oh, wait....

No they weren't they were socialists!

QUELLE SUPRISE!!!!!!

 
At 27 January, 2010 18:16, Anonymous KookLoonUltranationalist said...

LL is the only one making the argument that NAZIsm is a left-wing movement.
I'm still waiting for an explanation as to how debunkers of conspiracy theories put you in the same ideological category as Hitler.
In case you haven't noticed, the regular posters at this site have a range of political affiliations, they just all agree that Loose Change is a sick farce and that most Truthers are full of shit.
Maybe I just missed the posts where Pat and James call for a round up of Jews and military rule.

 
At 27 January, 2010 18:19, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

" Anonymous said...
Lazarus: get yourself to the nearest AA-meeting.

"reactionary leftism"

ROFLMAO!"

What, you still think reactionary leftists are the "vanguard of the prolitariat"??????

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAAAA!!!!!!

BWWWWAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA!!!!

WAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA!!!!

[stops to wipe tears of laughter from eyes]

BBBWWWWAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA!!!!!!!

Oh, fuck that's funny.

Pitiful, but high-larious.

 
At 27 January, 2010 18:25, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

Lazarus: LOL! So you found a kook rabid free market extremist to support your twisted views! Here's a quote from his WP article:


Mises' criticism of socialist paths of economic development is well-known, such as in his 1922 work Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis:

The only certain fact about Russian affairs under the Soviet regime with regard to which all people agree is: that the standard of living of the Russian masses is much lower than that of the masses in the country which is universally considered as the paragon of capitalism, the United States of America. If we were to regard the Soviet regime as an experiment, we would have to say that the experiment has clearly demonstrated the superiority of capitalism and the inferiority of socialism.


and:

Milton Friedman considered Mises intolerant in his personal behavior:

The story I remember best happened at the initial Mont Pelerin meeting when he got up and said, "You're all a bunch of socialists." We were discussing the distribution of income, and whether you should have progressive income taxes. Some of the people there were expressing the view that there could be a justification for it.


LOL. He's a kookloon right-wing apologist and nazi-revisionist, just like you!

 
At 27 January, 2010 18:27, Anonymous New Yorker said...

Oooh, they were so different. So when you go up North, Europe gradually becomes protestant, yes. So what? They were all right-wing ultra-nationalists, just like you lot.

I wasn't saying they were vastly different, moron. I was saying there were differences, particularly in the role played by the Catholic Church. I suppose trying to explain subtle differences to someone of your intelligence would be waste of time, however.

Also, I'm not a right-winger or an ultra-nationalist. I just think 9/11 "truth" is horseshit.

 
At 27 January, 2010 18:33, Anonymous KookLoonUltranationalist said...

He took the name I suggested for him! I'm so flattered :'-)
I'd hardly consider Ron Paul's favorite economist to be a Nazi apologist. A misguided idealouge, perhaps. I'm glad you're finally understanding that not everyone on the right of the political spectrum marches in lock step, as demonstrated by Friedman's criticism.

 
At 27 January, 2010 18:34, Anonymous New Yorker said...

Does anyone think that roid-rage will ever get to the point at which he'll actually present any evidence for his belief that 9/11 was an inside job? I mean, who fucking cares about Milton Friedman's personal distaste for Ludwig von Mises?

 
At 27 January, 2010 18:38, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

Well, the fact that he's worse than Friedman was exactly why I quoted that, but okay.

 
At 27 January, 2010 18:40, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

New Yorker, sure. I don't think 9/11 was an "inside job".

I'm a bit of a LIHOP-plus-er I'm afraid.

 
At 27 January, 2010 18:52, Anonymous KookLoonUltranationalist said...

I thoroughly enjoyed the Great Hitler Debate stemming from a post about... a Brit "debunking" the CIT folks.
RR, what are your main sources of information? What scares you aside from the gradual undermining of the bill of rights in the name of fighting terrace, the collapse of the economy, and the integration of national economies into a global economy run by transnational elites?

 
At 27 January, 2010 19:01, Anonymous New Yorker said...

New Yorker, sure. I don't think 9/11 was an "inside job".

Um, OK. Is there a reason you're shooting your mouth off here if you're in agreement with us? Why not join us in mocking Brian Good the next time he returns to babble about thermite?

I'm a bit of a LIHOP-plus-er I'm afraid.

Well, you can't prove a negative, but I don't think there's any reason to think the Bush administration consciously failed to act. I mean, everyone knew Hurricane Katrina was going to hit New Orleans with doomsday force, and the response to that was bungled. There's no reason to think that was deliberate either.

 
At 27 January, 2010 19:03, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"RR, what are your main sources of information?"

Karl Marx.

And the voices in his head.

 
At 27 January, 2010 19:05, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"LOL. He's a kookloon right-wing apologist and nazi-revisionist, just like you!"

So you got nothing.

Alrighty then.

....

Ahem.....

Stares down at shoes......

Ummmmm, aren't you embarased by the depths of your stupidity?

 
At 27 January, 2010 19:07, Anonymous KookLoonUltranationalist said...

OOOH, "I'm LIHOP+, I'm afraid." I thought you mean "I'm LIHOP and I'm afraid.

 
At 27 January, 2010 19:10, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

RR, what are your main sources of information? What scares you aside from the gradual undermining of the bill of rights in the name of fighting terrace, the collapse of the economy, and the integration of national economies into a global economy run by transnational elites?

Right. I yield. I have an enormous amount of sources, but.. the official reports, commercial reports, mainstream media, scientific papers (not just truther papers), sites like Jim Hoffman's, history commons, JREF, Mike Ruppert, Nafeez Ahmed, Jon Gold, documentaries, books, Youtube, fora, etc.

Hell..even CIT. Their sources prove a plane hit.

My fear: that both our own government and terrorists are after our freedoms, and we have no say over this matter as the conflict spirals out of control and radicalizes both sides. Totalitarianism is no cure for a defective foreign policy and energy problems. China and Russia shouldn't be defeated by dangerous CIA games. Power of example, not example of power.

My other fear: global socialism. LOL

 
At 27 January, 2010 19:21, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

New Yorker:

I just don't buy incompetence anymore. And I think most official reports are cover-ups. I mean.. trying to appoint Henry Kissinger as your head commissioner?? Zelikow as the executive director? Using torture to extract confessions?

Plus, I'd like us to stop sponsoring terrorists with one hand, and fighting them with the other.

"Intelligence failures" do occur. I spot them all the time in truther and debunker comments. LOL!

 
At 27 January, 2010 19:35, Anonymous KookLoonUltranationalist said...

Despite my many misgivings about Ruppert, I think he's semi-accurate with regards to the oil situation. Perhaps overly sensationalist, but accurate nonetheless. He also seems to understand Eurasian geo-politics though he misinterprets Zbigniew Brzezinski's "Grand Chessboard" as a call to dominate Eurasia when he's really calling for us to maintain a balance of power there.
China and Russia are an interesting pair. They really don't trust each other and haven't cooperated since the 1960's. I hear too many people speculating about a Sino-Russian axis of evil but it won't happen. Any such alliance would be led by China and Russia won't be led.
As I've said before in my ramblings on this site, China is winning the pipeline war in Central Asia at the expense of Europe and America and more importantly, Russia.
I guess the point I'm trying to make is that a multi-polar world is emerging where the US and Russia are just two of many power centers that will all push and shove and conspire against one another until a peaceful equilibrium is reached.
I hope.

 
At 27 January, 2010 19:37, Anonymous New Yorker said...

I just don't buy incompetence anymore. And I think most official reports are cover-ups. I mean.. trying to appoint Henry Kissinger as your head commissioner?? Zelikow as the executive director? Using torture to extract confessions?

Again, there's no evidence that the administration consciously failed to act. Were people covering their asses? I'm sure, but to cover up incompetence, not malice.

Also, al Qaeda was claiming credit for the attacks long before any of their members had been captured and waterboarded. KSM's claim about an attack on the Brooklyn Bridge might have been nonsense from a waterboarding session, but his claims about 9/11 were not.

Plus, I'd like us to stop sponsoring terrorists with one hand, and fighting them with the other.

OK, I'm with you on that one. FWIW, I think we no longer have any obligation to support the Karzai government since the last election was obviously a sham.

 
At 27 January, 2010 23:39, Anonymous Hardliner said...

Plus, I'd like us to stop sponsoring terrorists with one hand, and fighting them with the other.
How about Iran stops sponsoring attacks against our boys in Iraq, stops sponsoring Hizbullah, Hamas, the Houthi, and God only knows who else, and then and only then will we stop sponsoring Jundallah, the MEK and the Kurds. They can also stop building nuclear weapons and threatening Israel.
Until then, whomever we, the Israelis and the Saudis sponsor is fair game.

 
At 28 January, 2010 03:43, Anonymous sackcloth and ashes said...

'And please, we've heard the pretty telling "anti-semitic" and Holocaust denier slurs and guilt by association fallacies over & over.....'

So there's no particular reason why Israelis and Jews get blamed for 9/11 then?

'No, that's not "Jon Gold talking" you giant heap of malodorous mammary dandruff.'

I don't see him challenging that particular smear. And the fact that you've got no comment to make on an accusation against the dead speaks volumes.

FOAD, you piece of shit.

 
At 28 January, 2010 05:58, Anonymous Patrick Punchdrunk said...

Sackcloth sure hates being exposed as a shitty researcher at best, and a lying douchebag at worst, doesn't he?

(Nothing)New Yorker and Dave Shyte: if it's already been explained, why not point to the explanation, instead of cowering in fear? Just point to the exact clause in your "explanations" that convinced YOU, the superior critical thinker. You too, PAThetic Curley and JamesBitch.

 
At 28 January, 2010 06:23, Anonymous Troofers R Us said...

"(Nothing)New Yorker and Dave Shyte: if it's already been explained, why not point to the explanation, instead of cowering in fear? Just point to the exact clause in your "explanations" that convinced YOU, the superior critical thinker. You too, PAThetic Curley and JamesBitch."

says the little bitch pretending to be a war hero...

When are you, Barry jennings and your pathetic 2 seconds GA heading to Court little man?

 
At 28 January, 2010 06:39, Anonymous New Yorker said...

(Nothing)New Yorker and Dave Shyte: if it's already been explained, why not point to the explanation, instead of cowering in fear?

I already have pointed out the explanation.

Just point to the exact clause in your "explanations" that convinced YOU, the superior critical thinker.

I already did. And yes, I am a superior critical thinker to you.

 
At 28 January, 2010 07:28, Anonymous sackcloth and ashes said...

'Sackcloth sure hates being exposed as a shitty researcher at best,'

I wasn't the one who claimed to be an Iraq veteran, and didn't bother checking tour lengths that real soldiers serve, Walt. That was you.

'and a lying douchebag at worst, doesn't he?'

I may have got the truther's name wrong, but I got the smear right. One of you fuckers accused those who died on AA77 and UA93 of being both complicit in 9/11, and faking their deaths. Not one of you scum can find it in you to recognise this insult to the victims and their families for what it is.

Found the link on the Feds' confirming the Ahmed-Atta money transfer yet?

 
At 28 January, 2010 07:44, Anonymous Fat Scurrilous said...

"(blah blah nonsense)Walt. That was you."

Um, no it wasn't, but you're a shitty researcher & a lying douchebag, so I'm not surprised that you've swung & missed badly, yet again. You're also trying to tar many people with what one person said. I'm sure you'd love it if I judged you by the ridiculous, inane stupidity spouted by Troy, or Shat Curley, or JamesBitch, or Mark Roberts.

Meanwhile, Nothing New and Dave Shyte are still running in fear, unable to defend their faith, and pretending they're knowledgible. As you were, soldiers...

 
At 28 January, 2010 09:38, Blogger Dave Kyte said...

"Meanwhile, Nothing New and Dave Shyte are still running in fear, unable to defend their faith, and pretending they're knowledgible."

Well if we are so unknowing, why do you and Brian spend 90% of your time asking us question. I guess when you know so little about the events of 9/11 and the science of the collapse and have no proof of your own you ask questions, as if that is some deep insight or meaningful in some way. It's a lame tactic use by many conspiracy theorist types, and it only fools... fools. It's intellectually lazy, you never have to learn anything, just keep ponding out questions, and as learning is quite difficult for your type it's a prefect tactic.

But by all means show us how knowledgeable YOU are. Explain how a controlled demolition of a steel structure is done, what kind of explosive cutting devices are used and how they work. You see if you did know this as I do, you would see how silly the thermite deal is.

OR, you can keep asking stupid questions and complain when we don't take the time to school you.

 
At 28 January, 2010 09:41, Anonymous New Yorker said...

Meanwhile, Nothing New and Dave Shyte are still running in fear, unable to defend their faith, and pretending they're knowledgible.

It's already been explained. I can try teaching quantum mechanics to a spider monkey, but that doesn't mean the spider monkey will understand it. Just because you're too stupid to understand anything about physics or engineering doesn't mean what you're looking for isn't already out there.

 
At 28 January, 2010 09:55, Blogger Dave Kyte said...

My other fear: global socialism. LOL

So your are a tea bagger?

You notice the fearful are the one who are most likely to buy conspiracy theorist hype. Fear sells and the Alex Jones types cash in on that.

The only thing you should fear is incompetence, you are more likely to get screwed by the government because they f#*ked up, not because they’re out to get you.

 
At 28 January, 2010 10:09, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

Didn't you just know that PornBoy has a rabid interest in Nazis! No doubt he's one of the architects of the "9/11 truthers hate Jews" malarkey.

 
At 28 January, 2010 10:58, Anonymous Anonymous said...

So your are a tea bagger?

No, your is not a tea bagger. Got sarcasm?

You notice the fearful are the one who are most likely to buy conspiracy theorist hype. Fear sells and the Alex Jones types cash in on that.

You got that right. And the biggest fear mongers are our leaders. How many people died of aspirin last year? Shouldn't we be waging a war on aspirin? By the way, AJ is a nut. He did predict a 9/11-type attack in 2001 though, as did Bill Cooper before him.

The only thing you should fear is incompetence, you are more likely to get screwed by the government because they f#*ked up, not because they’re out to get you.

Right. Incompetence and conspiracy go hand in hand. All discovered conspiracies were unsuccessful. Factor in coincidence, and you've got the trifecta. In your world, no government conspiracies exist. This is equally delusional as saying everything is a government conspiracy. A conspiracy is defined as two or more people, committing a crime. Given that definition, history is replete with examples of government conspiracies. Government conspiracies don't involve the entire government, many times if not always we see uproar in Washingtonian circles when the left hand discovers what the right hand has been doing. Subsequently, heads roll. A Constitutional crisis may even occur.

Some conspiracies remain officially unacknowledged, some are are acknowledged. Some have basis, some don't. Some are rooted in science, some aren't. Now you can focus on everything in the 9/11 "truth" movement that is rotten, and use that part to discredit all of it. This is fallacious and irresponsible. It is emotion driven and intellectually lazy.

If you start to behave like an apologist for everything the government does wrong, declaring everything as "incompetence" while peddling hate for "terrrrists", in fact, you launch a barrage of Fox News-style anti-dissident propaganda attacks on whistleblowers, journalists, researchers, hell, even family members of victims, that's when I get antsy, and that, my friends, is why we ain't friends.

Besides, in the end I find that government terrorism is simply rationalized away as necessary anyway. The paradox being, of course, that government terrorism is ostensibly sometimes a necessary evil to protect national security.

Sacrifice one citizen for ten? One for a hundred? Torture? Wiretap? Mail anthrax? Where does it end? And for what? For safety? That kinda safety I don't want. Take your "national security" and shove it up your ass.

 
At 28 January, 2010 10:59, Anonymous sackcloth and ashes said...

'Um, no it wasn't ...'

Look, Walt, there's no point creating new sockpuppets and claiming you didn't pose as 'A Real Veteran'. You were enough of a wanker to claim that you'd fought in a war (even though in reality you're a spineless little sack of shit who couldn't fight his way out of a paper bag), and too much of a mong to do some background research to actually make your attempt to be an impostor convincing. Am I'm not going to let you forget it.

And I'm oh, so, sorry that I didn't match the right lie with the right liar. But then seeing as you cunts in the mis-named 'truth' movement have been prepared to smear just about anyone in your 8 1/2 years of frustration and failure, I'd say tough shit. As I've said before, you truthers are prepared to accuse ordinary working men and women of complicity in mass murder, so fuck you all, and may you all fall into an AIDS pit.

And as for telling lies and being shit at research, have you been able to get that link in which the FBI confirm that the ISI head wired Atta one hundred grand? Or - for that matter - have you been able to prove (with reference to the appropriate professional expertise) that it is possible (as you claim with WTC7) to have a CD in which the building collapses hours after the charges are detonated? Maybe you could also explain - as per your Able Danger rants - how it is possible for someone to defy the laws of physics and be simultaneously in NY and Afghanistan at the same time (as you claim with Atta)? And that's just for starters. If I nailed you on all your BS, I'd be here all night, and unlike some people here I do actually have a life.

 
At 28 January, 2010 11:42, Anonymous New Yorker said...

In your world, no government conspiracies exist.

No. Government conspiracies exist. Google "Watergate", pal. What we want from the "truth" movement is EVIDENCE that 9/11 was a conspiracy, OK?

Government conspiracies don't involve the entire government, many times if not always we see uproar in Washingtonian circles when the left hand discovers what the right hand has been doing.

Right. Do you know how many THOUSANDS would have had to be in on the conspiracy to make 9/11 work?

Now you can focus on everything in the 9/11 "truth" movement that is rotten, and use that part to discredit all of it.

We do, and in over 8 years, they have yet to produce anything that isn't rotten.

If you start to behave like an apologist for everything the government does wrong, declaring everything as "incompetence" while peddling hate for "terrrrists", in fact, you launch a barrage of Fox News-style anti-dissident propaganda attacks on whistleblowers, journalists, researchers, hell, even family members of victims, that's when I get antsy, and that, my friends, is why we ain't friends.

If, if, if. Stop the left-wing boilerplate and start giving examples of those of us here who are apologists for everything the government does wrong. You really need to get out more and start understanding that dismissal of lunatic conspiracy nonsense does not make one an apologist for George W. Bush anymore than dismissal of creationism makes one an apologist for Nazism (that straw man gets tossed around by creationist true believers from time to time).

Besides, in the end I find that government terrorism is simply rationalized away as necessary anyway. The paradox being, of course, that government terrorism is ostensibly sometimes a necessary evil to protect national security.

Hey, let's take an example of US Government terrorism: My Lai. Was that covered up? No. Did it become a huge scandal and stain upon this country? Yes. Did other military personnel try to stop it? Yes.

And that was over a few hundred Vietnamese, not thousands of Americans. Yet somehow, nobody ever objected to the 9/11 conspiracy, tried to stop it, blew the whistle, etc.

Sacrifice one citizen for ten? One for a hundred? Torture? Wiretap? Mail anthrax? Where does it end? And for what? For safety? That kinda safety I don't want. Take your "national security" and shove it up your ass.

What the fuck are you babbling about?

 
At 28 January, 2010 12:13, Blogger Dave Kyte said...

There are some very important reasons immense conspiracies do not happen, the greatest being the bigger they are the less likely they are to succeed, and more likely they are to be exposed. As Benjamin Franklin once said “Three men may keep a secret, if two of them are dead.” The more people who know, the more likely it is someone will blab, and people do talk, be it for money, fame or just because they found god on their death beds. Knowing this propensity for man to blather, anyone who entrust an important secret to anyone else is a fool. Best you could hope for is that the secret is kept hush-hush just long enough the plan to be achieved. People who are in the position to orchestrate any sort of covert action know this, and take it into account. KISS Keep It Simple Stupid, keep the numbers of operations small so to prevent failure in any one act from spoiling the entire enterprise.

The popular idea of a ruling inner circle of humanity who grandly orchestrates great events from behind the scenes seems to excite more interest from the general public. Movie makers play up to this all the time, the hero thwarts the evil governments plan, saves the days and gets the girl. Ha, If only real life were like that. Problem is, believers of insider conspiracy theories see themselves as the hero, a Quixotic syndrome, an illusory reassurance of their own virtue. Conspiracy give us hope when we feel powerless, all we have to do is kill one big dragon and all will be well with the world.

 
At 28 January, 2010 12:17, Blogger Dave Kyte said...

The conspiratorial mind set also provides a coinvent cover for ignorant bigoted people. They make the villains of these imagined conspiracies to be the educated wealthy, the Illuminati, bankers, business people. I wish I had a nickle for every 9/11, JFK, UFO loon muffin who has called me a government agent. Conspiracy thinking is greater among uneducated who may be inclined to believe it’s the “elite” who are keeping them down, rather then their own lack of education and ample gullibility. And while we are demonizing lets not forget the ever popular “Jews”. One of the first clues that 9/11 was orchestrated by someone other than Arab terrorist is the rumor, “No Jews died on 9/11″. Other times it is pure political rhetoric, all republicans are fascist, all Democrats are pinko Commies.

With that said, powerful people, movements, and institutions can carry out manipulative deceptive acts and nefarious agendas with success. But even they know these acts can not be kept secret for long, The Gulf of Tonkin Incident is all but ignored, Iran Contra meant only a small amount of jail time at Club Fed for Oliver North and didn’t effect President Reagan at all. For the people who did these actions the benefits far outweighed the inconvenience when the plots were exposed, as they knew it would be eventually. Far cry from events like JFK and 9/11 were the benefits are so small and the risk astronomical. We are talking treason and mass murder here, something the you won’t be able to minimize with any amounts of Spin Doctoring.

 
At 28 January, 2010 12:18, Anonymous Anonymous said...

He did predict a 9/11-type attack in 2001 though, as did Bill Cooper before him.
If you predict every year that a giant terrorist attack is going to happen, you don't get to claim foresight when it actually does. Jones and his zombies also predicted that the 2004 election was going to be postponed indefinitely, the same thing about 2008, I'd bet they'll make the same prediction about 2012.

 
At 28 January, 2010 12:26, Blogger Dave Kyte said...

"Now you can focus on everything in the 9/11 "truth" movement that is rotten, and use that part to discredit all of it."

The problem is there is nothing but idiots and losers in the 9/11 thing, take Brian Good for example. You may have been able to find a few bright people who got caught up in the bullshit due to Bush derangement syndrome early on. But after 9 years they have abandoned the truther thing leaving only the hard-core loonies.

A friend of mine was like that, and now realizes with help from me it's was silly and he is embarrassed about it.

 
At 28 January, 2010 12:28, Blogger Dave Kyte said...

Alex Jones also predicted Y2K was going to be a big deal. Remember Y2K, when NOTHING happened.

 
At 28 January, 2010 12:34, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

Wrong,Shyte! Although it was obvious to a lot of us,it became crystal clear and undeniable that White House Dummy Ronald Reagan facilitated and covered up the importation of thousands of tons of cocaine into the USA by his own CIA.He also incited war between Iran and Iraq while providing Saddam with his legendary arsenal of dirty weapons.Someone tell Shyte that we're picketing at 26 Federal Plaza tomorrow at noon,.We're protesting the constant,daily,year round prosecutions for various forms of conspiracy by the State aginst all and sundry.We feel this constitutes an unfair burden on we the people of our fair land.Also,the Debunker Cult has determined that any theory that posits a conspiracy is,by nature of its definition,null and void.Otherwise,coming along quite nicely on bass there Shyte!

 
At 28 January, 2010 12:45, Blogger Dave Kyte said...

Anonymous, if you care for this 9/11 Truth thing why not help to clean your own house of the controlled demolition nut jobs? The no planers, the Jew haters. In the way many anti war groups have made it clear Inside Job signs are not welcome at marches.

I am as liberal as they get, but I have no compunction about lampooning some idiots who thinks himself a progressive simple because he fears the "MAN" and entertain every government conspiracy theory as true because it's an article of faith.

 
At 28 January, 2010 12:52, Anonymous New Yorker said...

Dave Kyte's comment...

The problem is there is nothing but idiots and losers in the 9/11 thing.

...is followed by this functional illiteracy:

Wrong,Shyte! Although it was obvious to a lot of us,it became crystal clear and undeniable that White House Dummy Ronald Reagan facilitated and covered up the importation of thousands of tons of cocaine into the USA by his own CIA.He also incited war between Iran and Iraq while providing Saddam with his legendary arsenal of dirty weapons.Someone tell Shyte that we're picketing at 26 Federal Plaza tomorrow at noon,.We're protesting the constant,daily,year round prosecutions for various forms of conspiracy by the State aginst all and sundry.We feel this constitutes an unfair burden on we the people of our fair land.Also,the Debunker Cult has determined that any theory that posits a conspiracy is,by nature of its definition,null and void.Otherwise,coming along quite nicely on bass there Shyte!

Q. E. muthafuckin' D.

 
At 28 January, 2010 13:02, Anonymous Mark Knobsquirts said...

"Look, Walt, there's no point ... claiming you didn't pose as 'A Real Veteran" "fuck you...pit of AIDS... (blah blah stupid inanities)"

I never posed as ARV, so you can stop shitting yourself with apoplexy, raging at your humiliating exposure and continued frustration. It's unseemly.

Dave Shyte claims he 'helped' a 'friend' get 'cured' of conspiratorial thinking, and yet he's clearly unable to point to a simple explanation of how, and why, WTC7 experienced 2+ seconds of gravitational acceleration. First he said 'science is my thing' and couldn't answer, and now he says: "Well if we are so unknowing, why do you and Brian spend 90% of your time asking us question.(sic)", and he STILL can't answer.

Does this sound like someone who knows the science, or someone who continually runs away in fear?

New Yorker is SURE it's been explained, but can't find those pesky sources, so he...just says it's been explained. Right.

Carry on, lads. I enjoy watching you make complete fools of yourselves. Stupid, stupid children...if only that old, fat, hideous Pat could muster the breath between sandwiches to tell you how proud he is.

 
At 28 January, 2010 13:26, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Arhoolie said...
Wrong,Shyte! Although it was obvious to a lot of us,it became crystal clear and undeniable that White House Dummy Ronald Reagan facilitated and covered up the importation of thousands of tons of cocaine into the USA by his own CIA."

Most of which was consumed by you, right, you OCD lunatic?

You have all the symptoms of cocaine paranoia.

And you're insane.

Ever have your nose reconstructed after it collapsed?

 
At 28 January, 2010 13:28, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"...clearly unable to point to a simple explanation of how, and why, WTC7 experienced 2+ seconds of gravitational acceleration."

Actually, nobody cares.

 
At 28 January, 2010 14:10, Anonymous New Yorker said...

Dave Shyte claims he 'helped' a 'friend' get 'cured' of conspiratorial thinking, and yet he's clearly unable to point to a simple explanation of how, and why, WTC7 experienced 2+ seconds of gravitational acceleration.

It's good that Dave was able to do this, and it's good that his friend is capable of rational thought. You're hopeless, no there's no use in anything other than mocking you.

New Yorker is SURE it's been explained, but can't find those pesky sources, so he...just says it's been explained. Right.

I've presented the sources. Everything has been explained. It's not my fault you can't understand these things.

Carry on, lads. I enjoy watching you make complete fools of yourselves. Stupid, stupid children...if only that old, fat, hideous Pat could muster the breath between sandwiches to tell you how proud he is.

Nobody cares.

 
At 28 January, 2010 14:41, Blogger Dave Kyte said...

Does this sound like someone who knows the science, or someone who continually runs away in fear?

Oh yeah i'm afraid of a 55 year old retarded janitor.

It's someone who has explained this stuff until blue in the face only to the blank stare of the the idiots and another stupid question. And then a month later a repeat of the same stupid question.

My friend who I rescued from thutherism was at least smart enough to understand, all I had to do was explain the science of the event and point out the logical fallacies of the inside job loons. And the this came from a guy more liberal than he so he could not look at it like a political stand.

Clearly if you think the idea WTC7 experienced 2+ seconds of gravitational acceleration is meaningful in some way that imply a controlled demolition, you are incapable of understanding anything more complex than mopping floors.

You will notice unlike you I don't need to ask you questions about 9/11, WHY? Because nothing you can offer as far as insights is worthless. So keep asking questions Brian, and when you grow a brain and realize how stupid those questions are.

 
At 28 January, 2010 15:25, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

The problem is there is nothing but idiots and losers in the 9/11 thing, take Brian Good for example. You may have been able to find a few bright people who got caught up in the bullshit due to Bush derangement syndrome early on. But after 9 years they have abandoned the truther thing leaving only the hard-core loonies.

A friend of mine was like that, and now realizes with help from me it's was silly and he is embarrassed about it.


Did you vote for Bush both times? Are you a hardline republican? Did they fucking torture people or not? Are these chickenhawks responsible for the deaths of thousands of American/British soldiers and hundreds of thousands of Arabic/Persian over lies or not?

Don't tell me what those fucking people are and aren't capable of. All you are is a monkey who is monkey imitating your monkey ultra-nationalist cult. You love your retard zoo. You are divorced from reality. Who sent those fucking anthrax letters you dick? Did he work alone? Of course not. Senator Leahy knows that. The FBI knows that.

Remember who was blamed first? Al-fucking-Qaeda.

Read this. Wall Street Journal.

"The Anthrax Attacks Remain Unsolved"

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704541004575011421223515284.html

Dated 24 January 2010. That's right. 4 days ago.

Do you know what people who said it wasn't Al Qaeda were called? That's right. "Conspiracy theorists". People such as Ray McGovern, 27 year CIA veteran.

Bush and Cheney, who were taking the fucking antidote since 9/11, wanted to blame the terrrrists.

I don't have to wait for the perpetrator to confess before I even start suspecting. FBI director Mueller made a complete fool of himself in the hearing. Why? Because he's a fucking cover up artist, and Leahy wasn't having it.

There is a whole spectrum of opinion between kookloon extremists like you and fruitcake conspiracy theorists like no-planers and no-hijackers. Where do Ray McGovern, the Wall Street Journal, Senator Leahy and others fit in, in your little black and white with-us-or-against-us delusion? You present a false choice between two extremes, and rational people will thus rightfully conclude that you are a bullshitter and a delusional cult nationalist, defending untenable positions, protecting your cult leader and cult institution, under the banner of so-called skepticism. Fortunately for the real skeptics, you have neither the wit nor the weight required to succeed in that contemptable mission. Unfortunately, you ARE a symptom of massive post 9/11 McCarthyist stupidity, where we are somehow expected to be 'loyal' to a deeply corrupt system.

And who 'expects' us to be 'loyal'? Paid propagandists like Glenn Beck and full-fledged Stasi totalitarians like Cass Sunstein.

And of course, at the very bottom of this ladder of treachery we find the parrots, the mouthpieces and the foot soldiers: deceitful, arrogant, but above all, terminally unintelligent:

Stooges like you.

Say goodbye to the future sane you; in this universe in this time frame, he will not manifest.

 
At 28 January, 2010 15:41, Anonymous New Yorker said...

Cass Sunstein was involved in suppressing dissidents in East Germany? Who knew!

Please see a psychiatrist, Roid Rage. Either that, or try to refrain from smoking angel dust before posting here.

 
At 28 January, 2010 15:43, Anonymous New Yorker said...

Also, you still haven't presented any evidence that 9/11 was an inside job, nor that people like Dave and I are right-wingers.

 
At 28 January, 2010 16:33, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Did you vote for Bush both times?"

Yep. And I'm really proud of it.

"Are you a hardline republican?"

No, as I've explained to you, I'm a classical liberal. Don't blame me if you can't understand what that is.

"Did they fucking torture people or not?"

Ummm........no.


"Are these chickenhawks..."

Ah, the ultimate insult of the cowardly reactionary leftist.

You're not good enough to lick the sand from my sons combat boots.

"....responsible for the deaths of thousands of American/British soldiers and hundreds of thousands of Arabic/Persian over lies or not?"

Um.....no. And stop lying with the "hundreds of thousands" bullshit, boy.

"Remember who was blamed first? Al-fucking-Qaeda."

Ummmmm......they're still to blame.

"Do you know what people who said it wasn't Al Qaeda were called? That's right. "Conspiracy theorists"."

I prefer the more technical term 'insane paranoid nutbag'. It has a certain ring to it.

"I don't have to wait for the perpetrator to confess before I even start suspecting."

You do a real good job at rejecting all reality there, bunky.

"You present a false choice between two extremes, and rational people will thus rightfully conclude that you are a bullshitter and a delusional cult nationalist, defending untenable positions, protecting your cult leader and cult institution, under the banner of so-called skepticism."

No, they'll read your carpet chewing hysteria and conclude that it's YOU who's the insane paranoid nutbag.

"And who 'expects' us to be 'loyal'?"

Real Americans, you treasonous scumbag.


"And of course, at the very bottom of this ladder of treachery we find the parrots, the mouthpieces and the foot soldiers: deceitful, arrogant, but above all, terminally unintelligent:

Stooges like you."

Mheh. 'Stooges'. From the America hating lunatic.

I wear it as a badge of honor.

Now since you can't migrate to the Soviet Union anymore (Thank you, Ronaldus Magnus!), why don't you go to Cuba. It's only a 90 mile swim in shark infested waters.

Adios, comrade!

 
At 28 January, 2010 16:44, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

Well,there he goes again! PornBoy channeling Ronbo and rendering the Founding Fathers obsolete with his lunatic contention that to criticize power abusers is to tear down one's country! Jeepers,jackoff,what is your major malfunction?

 
At 28 January, 2010 16:51, Blogger Dave Kyte said...

Stooges like you.

And yet, I as a person, as a thinker am a better person than you.

That is what hurts you so badly, you ARE a kook, a loony, a fool, and when people see you and hear you speak, they don't say, "There goes is a bright talented funny guy" NO, they recognize you as the crackpot loser you are.

I would not piss on Bush or any conservative if they were on fire, AND I hold the same regard for pseudo-liberals scumbags who make real liberals look bad, Ah, it's you I am talking about here. Like Brian, a not very bright guy who spews rhetoric as if is insight.

So keep jerking off to the idea you matter in the real world...... You hear that laughter? It's us watching the clowns of 9/11 Truth.

 
At 28 January, 2010 17:01, Anonymous JamesBoob said...

"Oh yeah i'm afraid of a 55 year old retarded janitor."

Wow, that's tough. You're... afraid of your crushing humiliation and exposure here. You're an illiterate who either doesn't understand, or pretends not to. Not good for you either way, son. You'll clearly say ANYTHING to avoid answering directly, including this beauty:

"If you think the idea WTC7 experienced 2+ seconds of gravitational acceleration is meaningful in some way that imply a controlled demolition (SIC), you are incapable of understanding anything more complex than mopping floors." STUNDIED, BEEYOTCH.

And this:
"WHY? Because nothing you can offer as far as insights is worthless." <-- DO YOU REALIZE THIS IS A COMPLIMENT, JACKASS?

Look, imbecile: you're making a fool of yourself. I can't even mock you as much as you mock yourself, and that's ALMOST beyond PAThetic.

 
At 28 January, 2010 17:02, Blogger Dave Kyte said...

Also, you still haven't presented any evidence that 9/11 was an inside job, nor that people like Dave and I are right-wingers.

This idiot needs to do that, And he is the one who complains about a us versus them mentality. Yes I hold the us versus them concept, Rational thinking people versus the gullible conspiracy prone types.

The world is full of suckers, and what better place to find suckers, NOT skeptic debunkers groups, NO your best bet is any one of the countless groups dedicated to JFK plots, Fake Moon landings, Free energy, Chemtrails and 9/11 Truth. They will buy anything. Bet you could make a killing selling homeopathic medicine to these rubes.

 
At 28 January, 2010 17:19, Blogger Dave Kyte said...

Yes Brian you are what they would call SLOW, and I bet I am not the first person to tell you that.

Isn't that why you need to live with mom and dad at your age? A short bus mental defect. If not it's just plain sad. Yes Brian I suck at typing and rarely proof what it type, So what. My point is made and my logic is solid, I know more bout 9/11, science and physics than you. But how anyone not? You are after all a 55 year old retarded janitor.

You mommy may tuck you in at night and tell you, you are "Special".

And if all you proof for a controlled demolition is your own personal lack of understanding of how the collapse happened than you have nothing.

 
At 28 January, 2010 17:32, Anonymous Wan N Weak said...

"They will buy anything. Bet you could make a killing selling homeopathic medicine to these rubes."

They certainly won't buy the idea that you have any real clue about WTC 7, as you repeatedly demonstrate. By all means, please continue dodging and weaving. Patrick "Free-Fall" Curley could use a sparring partner for his big fight against an old professor.

 
At 28 January, 2010 17:33, Blogger Dave Kyte said...

Look, imbecile: you're making a fool of yourself. I can't even mock you as much as you mock yourself, and that's ALMOST beyond PAThetic.

Brian, you can't mock anyone because you are not clever enough.

You can't even describe how a controlled demolition is done, but you know the WTC was just that. And you won't even try because you know you will get it wrong. So you stick to stupid question until your teachers get bored of you and then declare victory because we blew you off.

 
At 28 January, 2010 17:38, Blogger Dave Kyte said...

They certainly won't buy the idea that you have any real clue about WTC 7, as you repeatedly demonstrate.

Still waiting for you to tell us all how WTC 7 was a controlled demolition. How was it done? What kind of devices?, how do they work? Where were they placed?

PROVE YOUR CASE.

And when you do, I will correct your mistakes and have questions of my own.

 
At 28 January, 2010 17:51, Anonymous Raving Shyte said...

Good for you, Subaru. Best of luck with your research. Call me when you want to exchange real ideas, or when you want another embarrassing beat-down, imbecile.

 
At 28 January, 2010 17:55, Blogger Dave Kyte said...

"But how anyone not? You are after all a 55 year old retarded janitor."

Oh, I meant to say "But how could anyone not? You are after all a 55 year old retarded janitor."

So Brian, before you get all excited and think you are better than myself because I type badly, don't forget, you ARE a 55 year old loser of a man (if you can be called that) who lives at home because you're not smart enough to do anything of value for anyone. In other words, your typical truther, just older.

 
At 28 January, 2010 18:01, Blogger Dave Kyte said...

Good for you, Subaru. Best of luck with your research. Call me when you want to exchange real ideas,

OK, and you are??????????? Who?

I understand there is a certain amount of shame in being a truther.

My name is right there, I am not hiding, and certainly not afraid to bitch slap a loser truther over the phone.

 
At 28 January, 2010 18:07, Anonymous Kyte Krashes Again said...

Hey idiot, I hate to tell you this, but my name isn't Brian, and I'm not 55. Shyte's research strikes again. Buh Bye, imbecile.

 
At 28 January, 2010 19:45, Anonymous New Yorker said...

Yeah, this loser isn't Brian. Brian will only post as "anonymous" going forward, I guarantee. His writing style is markedly different from this guy. Plus, Brian's "nobody cares" obsession is with the NIST report. This guy's "nobody cares" obsession is with "gravitational acceleration" at WTC 7.

As best as I can tell, we have 4 semi-regular "truthers" here: Brian, spacebar guy, roid rage, and gravitational acceleration guy. The only one with a modicum of intelligence is roid rage, but he's got to learn some anger management techniques.

They certainly won't buy the idea that you have any real clue about WTC 7, as you repeatedly demonstrate. By all means, please continue dodging and weaving. Patrick "Free-Fall" Curley could use a sparring partner for his big fight against an old professor.

WTC 7 has already been explained.

 
At 28 January, 2010 19:47, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Kyte Krashes Again said...
Hey idiot, I hate to tell you this, but my name isn't Brian, and I'm not 55. Shyte's research strikes again. Buh Bye, imbecile."

But you are a retarded, ignorant Twoooofer™ OCD driven conspiracy kook.

And you mentally ill rabid rants are boring.

 
At 28 January, 2010 21:16, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

Lazarus Long.

He voted for Bush twice, yet refers to himself as a "classical liberal". Ludwig von Mises, his nut job cult leader, thinks the Nazis were leftists, a view in which he stands alone, both worldwide and in Europe.

Lazarus Long claims Bush and Cheney didn't torture people.

Lazarus Long implies Bush and Cheney actually saw combat.

How about your son licks the boots of two of my friends, one of whom served two tours in Afghanistan as a medic and one who fought the Taliban as a soldier for the Northern Alliance.

Lazarus Long then denies the Bush administration lied about Iraq.

He denies hundreds of thousands of Iraqis died as a result r consequence of the 2003 invasion.

Subsequently, Lazarus Long blames Al Qaeda for the anthrax attacks. Those who disagree, such as EVEN the fucking FBI, are "paranoid nutbags". This, he calls: "rejecting reality". LOL!

Then, people who believe all this batshit insane nonsense are the "real Americans" according to Lazarus Long, as opposed to the "American hating lunatics"

In conclusion, I must of course be, according to this kookloon McCarthyist, a "communist who should move to Cuba or Russia"

....

LAWL! I don't need to add anything to this, do I? This is pretty disturbing, pathetic, and embarrassing all by itself. Kookloon ultra-nationalist indeed. In fact, it might be an understatement! =)

My God, seek help. This is really, really bad. For the love of mankind, start taking pills. I'm serious, you are a danger to your friends and family. Best of luck recovering.

Good lord.

 
At 28 January, 2010 21:47, Anonymous Damocles said...

RR
If you try hard enough you can get them to fight over Obama. It's quite entertaining. Of course it also proves the ideological diversity of the regular posters at this site.
How did your friend fight with the Northern Alliance? Is he an Uzbek, a Tajik or an intelligence officer? I'm just curious, not trying to be a smart ass.

 
At 28 January, 2010 22:03, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

Damocles, Tajik.

 
At 28 January, 2010 22:15, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

BTW, Damocles, I'm not trying to say all SLC frequenters are like LL, but LL serves as the perfect example of rampant kookloon denialism.

Shift the topic to anywhere, you take your pick. Mr. ultra-nationalist Kookloon will deny it ever happened.

It's easy to get my point across: SLC frequenters such as LL are batshit crack pipe nut job elbow licking ear nibbling diaper crapping cuckoo fucking insane. He would deny manure if he slept in it. Crackers like LL need straitjackets, not straight talk.

 
At 28 January, 2010 22:27, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

But I have to admit, reading this blog sheds much light on the denialist side of the spectrum. A welcome change from the conspiracist side. My amazement at the psychological pathology here matches or exceeds that of conspiracy forums. I mean... good lord. I'm not sure even JREF is this bad.

I salute Pat for his apparent dedication to freedom of expression.

At least, as far as commenting on this blog goes.

I'm sure he'd like us all persecuted.

 
At 28 January, 2010 22:43, Anonymous Damocles said...

You should read infowars forums. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to criticize our intelligence agencies (and those of other countries) and the established order, however the conspiracy circles suffer from (in my opinion) two major flaws.
First of all there are too many... for lack of a better term, crazy people. Go read infowars' forums. It's full of extreme Christian eschatology, numerologists and all forms of unscientific nonsense. To be fair, there is no monolithic conspiracy movement but there are clear "leaders," some of whom are more visible than others, and guess who become the most visible, the crazy ones.
Second, and this links into the first, people chase misdirection. If 90% of the information out there is bullshit, it's impossible to distinguish the 10% that is real. Furthermore investigators spend all their energy chasing nonsense. I think the best (and my favorite) example of this is the UFO phenomenon. People noticed what were most likely secret air-force projects and then UFO stories and sighting explode in frequency. Of course public interest follows the most sensational story.

 
At 28 January, 2010 22:52, Anonymous Roman Craig said...

"How about your son licks the boots of two of my friends, one of whom served two tours in Afghanistan as a medic and one who fought the Taliban as a soldier for the Northern Alliance."

yawn...

"my friends"?

You're kidding - right?

 
At 28 January, 2010 22:54, Anonymous Roman Craig said...

"I'm sure he'd like us all persecuted."

No. I'm pretty sure sure he doesn't give a rat's ass about most of you.

 
At 28 January, 2010 22:59, Anonymous Damocles said...

Also, it is much easier for a debunker to point out flaws in evidence and epistemology than for the accuser to prove a crime.
I don't know anything about Pat or James' political affiliations but I imagine most of the regulars on this site accept that Iran/contra happened, that Watergate happened and some of them probably accept that our intelligence agencies have behaved in immoral if not illegal ways.
Of course I could be wrong.
Personally I find the idea of "blowback management" much much more plausible than the notion that that the intelligence agencies actively plan and execute terrorist attacks like 9-11. I'm pretty sure Chomsky has written about this.
As far as 9-11 goes, I think their was a cover up of how deeply involved we were with various Islamic groups in Asia. Islamic radicals were the most effective weapon we found to use against the Soviets and there is no denying that we armed the Mujaheddin to the teeth in Afghanistan.
But I don't think we stopped there, I think we were actively supporting Islamic groups in Central Asia to re-Islamize the region so that the Russians couldn't re-assert themselves there. Saudi Arabia backed this plan too of course, they're always our partners in crime. We were probably also using these groups to stir up trouble in Xinjiang and possibly even in Chechnya and the Balkans.
Any thorough investigation in the wake of 9-11 would have revealed a lot of this so somethings had to be covered up, denied, and misdirection put in place (like no-planes etc.).
Anyways I'm just babbling on and speculating wildly now. I hope you'll continue posting here because you make the debate much more lively!

 
At 28 January, 2010 23:01, Anonymous Troofers R Us said...

Roid Rage... not your typical troofer. Instead he chooses the kinder-gentler approach of playing the neutral middle-of-the-road wishy-washy type.

Either 9/11 was an inside job or it wasn't. Well which one was it princess?

 
At 28 January, 2010 23:14, Anonymous G. Shumway said...

You were actually making sense until this:

"I think we were actively supporting Islamic groups in Central Asia to re-Islamize the region so that the Russians couldn't re-assert themselves there. Saudi Arabia backed this plan too of course, they're always our partners in crime. We were probably also using these groups to stir up trouble in Xinjiang and possibly even in Chechnya and the Balkans."

"re-Islamize the region"?

Exactly when did it become un-islamized?

"they're always our partners in crime."

Glad we have more than one partner in the ME.

"Chechnya"

Please share your thought process on this one.

 
At 28 January, 2010 23:28, Anonymous Damocles said...

Exactly when did it become un-islamized?
During 70 years of Soviet occupation. The Soviets attempted to secularize and Russianize the peoples of Central Asia. After the dissolution of the Soviet Union the Soviet holdovers conveniently rediscovered their Islamic faith to gain legitimacy with their people. I believe people there would have rediscovered their religion no matter what, but Saudi money actively supported mosque construction and Islamic political parties.
As far as Chechnya goes, I hope to God that we have not been involved there but if I was trying to destabilize Russia, backing its Muslim republics in the North Caucuses would be the most logical way to do it. The Russians routinely accuse us of meddling there, not that their accusations hold much weight, but this isn't something I just made up. Turkey and Iran both have historically had spheres of influence or outright empires that included those territories and as they are rising powers they are most likely seeking to reestablish influence there. Point being there are many players there, some of whom are our close allies.

 
At 29 January, 2010 04:24, Anonymous sackcloth and ashes said...

'Although it was obvious to a lot of us,it became crystal clear and undeniable that White House Dummy Ronald Reagan facilitated and covered up the importation of thousands of tons of cocaine into the USA by his own CIA.'

So Reagan is both an idiot, and someone cunning enough to cover up his own government's role in the drugs trade. Yeah, that makes sense ...

'He also incited war between Iran and Iraq while providing Saddam with his legendary arsenal of dirty weapons.'

Walt, watch and learn:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1H-yQoo-i5Y&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apcE9-AC3IM&feature=related

If you also did your homework you'd realise that Saddam attacked Iran in September 1980. Reagan was inaugurated in January 1981. And you had the nerve to call me shit at research - you can't even get your basic facts right (12 months for a tour on OEF or OIF, BTW).

As for Saddam's WMD arsenal, it was the French who sold him the Osirak nuclear reactor, the Soviets who flogged him Scud ballistic missiles, and West German firms sold him the precursors for chemical weapons.

Any answers to my questions from last evening? Thought not. Stand by for the next incontinent rant from our fantasist friend.

 
At 29 January, 2010 05:16, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Roid Rage said...
Lazarus Long.

He voted for Bush twice, yet refers to himself as a "classical liberal". Ludwig von Mises, his nut job cult leader, thinks the Nazis were leftists, a view in which he stands alone, both worldwide and in Europe."

Well, no. Wrong again, moron. Anyone who knows history knows that fascists were and are reactionary left wingers.

"Lazarus Long claims Bush and Cheney didn't torture people."

They didn't.

"Lazarus Long implies Bush and Cheney actually saw combat."

Where? Where?

Oh, nowhere.

But President Bush was a fighter pilot in the TANG, which makes him about a million times more of a man than you could ever hope to be.

"How about your son licks the boots of two of my friends, one of whom served two tours in Afghanistan as a medic and one who fought the Taliban as a soldier for the Northern Alliance."

But you didn't. Typical.

Oh, and now you're claiming you speak Tajik? Sure you do.

BTW, my son has done two two tours. So, like I said, you're not good enough to lick the sand from his combat boots.

"Lazarus Long then denies the Bush administration lied about Iraq."

They didn't. Try learning some history, instead of propaganda.

"He denies hundreds of thousands of Iraqis died as a result r consequence of the 2003 invasion."

They didn't. Try learning some history, instead of propaganda

"Then, people who believe all this batshit insane nonsense are the "real Americans" according to Lazarus Long, as opposed to the "American hating lunatics"

In conclusion, I must of course be, according to this kookloon McCarthyist, a "communist who should move to Cuba or Russia""

Maybe you should make some inquiries. Like I said, it's only a 90 mile swim.

"LAWL! I don't need to add anything to this, do I? This is pretty disturbing, pathetic, and embarrassing all by itself. Kookloon ultra-nationalist indeed. In fact, it might be an understatement! =)

My God, seek help. This is really, really bad. For the love of mankind, start taking pills. I'm serious, you are a danger to your friends and family. Best of luck recovering.

Good lord."

It's always interesting to see a raging case of projection presented in such an open and obvious manner.

Seek professional help, my friend.

 
At 29 January, 2010 05:57, Anonymous sackcloth and ashes said...

'He denies hundreds of thousands of Iraqis died as a result r consequence of the 2003 invasion'

The vast majority being killed by fellow Iraqis, or by foreign fanatics like Zarqawi's mob. Forgot that little detail, didn't you.

Incidentally, having confused Jon Gold's rants with those of some other lying truther scumbag, I thought I'd better issue a fulsome and sincere apology:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSHaCzb3yYk

 
At 29 January, 2010 07:54, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

When PornBoy starts shooting up synthetic testosterone,look out!! Now we find him arguing that the barbaric and criminal invasion of Iraq DIDN'T result in over a million deaths and DIDN'T turn millions into refugees in their own homelands and in neighboring countries.And,of course,Soldier Sad Sack pipes in with the predictable insanity:"Yea,it was jihadists that done it all".In the Debunker Cult you can toss anything out there and it's just considered healthy expression,part of the fun!

 
At 29 January, 2010 08:12, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

" Arhoolie said...
When PornBoy starts shooting up synthetic testosterone,look out!! Now we find him arguing that the barbaric and criminal invasion of Iraq DIDN'T result in over a million deaths and DIDN'T turn millions into refugees in their own homelands and in neighboring countries.And,of course,Soldier Sad Sack pipes in with the predictable insanity:"Yea,it was jihadists that done it all".In the Debunker Cult you can toss anything out there and it's just considered healthy expression,part of the fun!"

assholio is arguing with the voices in his head again.

Do they ever toss you out of the library when you start doing that, assholio?

 
At 29 January, 2010 08:51, Anonymous Cooper Harris said...

"Now we find him arguing that the barbaric and criminal invasion of Iraq DIDN'T result in over a million deaths and DIDN'T turn millions into refugees in their own homelands"

I know walt, you miss Saddam and psychotic sons Uday and Qusay. You "millions" are a joke of an exageration and we both know that.

I see they hanged that mass murderer Chemical Ali this week. Did that make you sad too?

 
At 29 January, 2010 10:05, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

"The vast majority being killed by fellow Iraqis, or by foreign fanatics like Zarqawi's mob. Forgot that little detail, didn't you."

Nope, I didn't, which is why I specifically said "as a result or consequence" in anticipation of your predictable reply. When you set a fire, you are responsible for every other fire that erupts as a result of that fire spreading. No invasion: no Al Qaeda in Iraq. Am I happy Saddam is gone: yes. But he was removed from power by western rulers almost as bad. I don't have to side with fascists to join the anti-dictator club, sorry.

"Incidentally, having confused Jon Gold's rants with those of some other lying truther scumbag, I thought I'd better issue a fulsome and sincere apology:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSHaCzb3yYk"


You're prettier than you are smart. =)

 
At 29 January, 2010 10:22, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"No invasion: no Al Qaeda in Iraq."

Ooops, wrong again.

HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAAAA!!!!

wow, Krazee, you're easy.

"But he was removed from power by western rulers almost as bad."

How is it "bad" to liberate 25 million people, dickwad?

 
At 29 January, 2010 11:13, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

Nope. No invasion, no Al Qaeda in Iraq. Or at least not above background noise level. Sorry, con artist, that's reality. I understand you are divorced from that.

"How is it "bad" to liberate 25 million people, dickwad?"

Shit man, you just murdered an additional 6 million Iraqis! It's like a virtual Holocaust!

Is there an end to your shit storm of lies, you extremist cretin?

 
At 29 January, 2010 12:34, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

Direct from a cramming session with the Rush Limbaugh playbook comes our deranged lunatic PornBoy.Since you're dumb enough to believe that the USA "liberated" 25 million Iraqis (excuse me while I prepare your fix),I can see why you'd fall for the 9/11 Commission Report and all the other propaganda they ladle into your doghouse.

 
At 29 January, 2010 14:01, Anonymous New Yorker said...

Once again, I'd like to inject nuance into this flame war, and suggest that things are much better in Kurdistan now than they were before the 2003 US invasion. On the other hand, the Peshmerga probably could have kept Saddam's army at bay so long as the northern no-fly zone was enforced.

So while most of Iraq is a disaster of a failed state, Iraqi Kurdistan is a model state for the developing world to emulate.

 
At 29 January, 2010 23:57, Anonymous Erik Prince said...

"Shit man, you just murdered an additional 6 million Iraqis! It's like a virtual Holocaust!"

Your link peckerhead...

Some studies have placed the number of civilians deaths as high as 655,000 (see The Lancet study), although most studies estimate a lower number; the Iraq Body Count project indicates a significantly lower number of civilian deaths than that of The Lancet Study, though IBC organizers acknowledge that their statistics are an undercount as they base their information off of media-confirmed deaths. The website of the Iraq body count states, "Our maximum therefore refers to reported deaths - which can only be a sample of true deaths unless one assumes that every civilian death has been reported. It is likely that many if not most civilian casualties will go unreported by the media."[58]

 
At 30 January, 2010 00:29, Anonymous S. Jensen said...

Walt - since Saddam, Uday and Quasay are all gone - how does your circle jerk work with just one guy?

 
At 30 January, 2010 00:37, Anonymous G. Shumway said...

Walt - I do believe this guy thinks you're full of shit...

http://www.youtube.com/user/gordonshumway7#p/f/310/75w4XIO9tHU

 
At 30 January, 2010 06:40, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Some studies have placed the number of civilians deaths as high as 655,000 (see The Lancet study)"

Which has been proved to be a pile of reactionary leftist horseshit.

 
At 30 January, 2010 09:39, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

PornBoy:as Far Right and twisted as a human being can possibly go.

 
At 30 January, 2010 12:51, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

It's funny how the one Debunker Cult stalwart who exhibits ALL the indicators of an over stimulated and hallucinatory thought process accuses ANYONE of snorting too much cocaine!! Screeching Wildman and Insane Popinjay that he is,it's still sad to see folks hurtle so rapidly down the slope.Well,at least he's hiding behind a moniker.I guess that's part of his strategy to avoid interventions from friends and family.

 
At 31 January, 2010 10:00, Blogger Dennis Bosher said...

Hi everyone here's a place you can advertise your design services for FREE!! Find A Designer

 
At 31 January, 2010 17:29, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

In case you missed the scintillating point that the insane muppet PornBoy made before,here goes: "the Lancet study is a pile of reactionary leftist horseshit".

 
At 01 February, 2010 11:49, Anonymous sackcloth and ashes said...

Hey Walt, why don't you quote the IBC stats, which not only refers to verified fatalities, but also describes the circumstances in which they were killed? Is it because it shows that majority of Iraqis killed since OIF began died at the hands of the 'resistance'? Thought so.

But then you should be clued up about Iraqi-related matters anyway. After all, you did serve 3 years in-country, didn't you?

 
At 01 February, 2010 15:57, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

Ah,the "majority".Where's Colin Powell when drinks are on Sackdoily?

 
At 02 February, 2010 05:17, Anonymous sackcloth and ashes said...

'Ah,the "majority".Where's Colin Powell when drinks are on Sackdoily?'

He's just come from the ceremony where he awarded you a Congressional for your three year tour in Iraq, Walt.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home