Wednesday, February 03, 2010

Krazy Kevin Barrett Goes Jihadi

Hang 'Em High now fantasizes about taking up arms against the US government:

Since the 9/11 inside job and the criminal wars of aggression it enabled, the ostensible US government has lost whatever shred of legitimacy it once possessed. Now that the Supreme Coup has made corporate money the supreme law of the land, and peace-prize warmonger Obama has revealed himself as a CIA/Wall Street fraud, US citizens could be forgiven if they decided that working within the system is no longer an option.

If Anwar al-Awlaki really has taken up arms against the rogue regime that has overthrown the Constitution of the United States of America, maybe the rest of us should follow his example.


Awlaki is the cleric who was in contact with both the Fort Hood shooter and the Christmas underpants bomber.

Labels:

86 Comments:

At 03 February, 2010 06:35, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

Technically, this is know as "Treason".

The mask slips, and the true truther gibbering underneath is revealed.

 
At 03 February, 2010 06:55, Anonymous William Rodriguez said...

Kevin's my boy.

 
At 03 February, 2010 06:55, Anonymous sackcloth and ashes said...

Knowing Barrett, if anyone handed him a shooter he'd put a round in his foot and blow his toes off.

 
At 03 February, 2010 07:16, Anonymous New Yorker said...

Something tells me that the kind of Americans who would take up arms against the US government, the McVeighs and Rudolphs of the world, wouldn't have much use for a fat, pasty academic who converted to Islam.

You can try as much as you want to be like the cool kids, Kevin, but it ain't gonna work.

 
At 03 February, 2010 09:00, Anonymous Anonymous said...

for sure, the dipshits around here would know how cool treason is...

 
At 03 February, 2010 09:44, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

"Technically,this is known as treason"?!? Sorry,Bozo,but that's clearly free speech and only a Troglodyte jackoff like you would bring treason into the mix.Just like any criticism of Israel is Jew hating,in your addled brain.Why do you even bother?

 
At 03 February, 2010 10:15, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Talking about it is free speech, although its fair game for the FBI to watch you in response to your irresponsible rambling.
Engaging in it is treason.

Anon@9:00
Back up your assertions if you're accusing people of waging war against the United States

Krazee
Please keep posting, laughing is good for you I've heard.

People like Barrett need to be watched. People like Krazee and petgout need to be laughed at.

 
At 03 February, 2010 10:18, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Arhoolie said...
"Technically,this is known as treason"?!?"

FOAD, you America hating scumbag.


"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court."

-The Constitution of the United States.

And once againg the fucktard shows he knows fuck all about anything.

 
At 03 February, 2010 11:43, Anonymous sackcloth and ashes said...

'for sure, the dipshits around here would know how cool treason is...'

Ah, I see. It's that tired-old truther 'you debunkers are all betraying the American people by covering up da troof!!!!' BS. Well here's a newsflash for you, shit for brains:

(1) I'm not American, and
(2) You're as much of a mong as Arseholie (AKA 'A Real Veteran').

 
At 03 February, 2010 11:49, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

PornBoy sure has thrown in the towel,eh TriteDopey? I'm sure even the hysterical Debunker Cult that he's motoring will acknowledge that he's "more inspirational than operational"! This moron has the intellectual scaffolding of a Hamburger University graduate.

 
At 03 February, 2010 12:52, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

" Arhoolie said...
PornBoy sure has thrown in the towel,eh TriteDopey? I'm sure even the hysterical Debunker Cult that he's motoring will acknowledge that he's "more inspirational than operational"! This moron has the intellectual scaffolding of a Hamburger University graduate."

Treason boy gets cockslapped and all he can do is sputter in rage.

Go fuck yourself with a swordfish.

Sideways.

 
At 03 February, 2010 13:13, Anonymous Traffic Cop said...

Iran announced Wednesday it launched a menagerie of animals — including a mouse, two turtles and worms — into space on a research rocket, a feat President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said showed Iran could defeat the West in the battle of technology.

OH NOOOO!!!! The same type of defeat spacebarslug, Brian and Boris (aka Neil and Bob) and the ultra short lasting Roid Rage give us on a daily basis - LMMFAO!

 
At 03 February, 2010 13:42, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

I don't discriminate between traffic cops and muslims when the revolution comes.

LOL!

 
At 03 February, 2010 14:06, Anonymous Damocles said...

There will not be a revolution, nor "the" revolution. Messianic religions have always perplexed me.

 
At 03 February, 2010 14:19, Anonymous Damocles said...

And honestly, why would you want a violent overthrow of the government? When have those EVER ended well?
The Iranian liberals marched against the Shah only to have him replaced by Khomeini who executed half of them and jailed the rest.
Russians overthrew the Czar and got Lenin, Stalin and 70 years of backwardness.
If anyone managed to overthrow our civilian government it would most likely come from within the military, given that you constantly bitch about reactionaries and ultra-nationalists, how do you think that would end up? Let's pretend that some group of armed rabble were able to take over the government, do you really think some benevolent vanguard of the proletariat would take power and usher in a golden age where man no longer exploits man?
OR, or do you just want an excuse to rape, plunder and murder with impunity, which is usually what happens when power collapses?
I will never understand revolution-fetishism.
It's just another messianic coping mechanism as far as I'm concerned. Like the oppressed Hebrews in ancient times thinking to themselves "one day the Messiah will come and free us from this misery!"
Of course, their Messiah still hasn't arrived.

 
At 03 February, 2010 14:31, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Here's a messiah for you

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqWtiAtSvg0&feature=player_embedded#

 
At 03 February, 2010 14:38, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Unemployment is as bad today as it was at the height of the Great Depression and is only getting worse. You can't rule out the possibility that people will take to the streets and overwhelm the governments ability to control them. People are tired of crony capitalism and one-party-two-sides rule.

 
At 03 February, 2010 14:49, Anonymous ConsDemo said...

Anonymous said...
Unemployment is as bad today as it was at the height of the Great Depression and is only getting worse.


Can you dipshits get anything right?

"From an estimated annual rate of 3.3 percent during 1923-29, the unemployment rate rose to a peak of about 25 percent in 1933."

In case you don't know, its 10% today. Now I'm sure you and many of your troofer boyfriends are unemployed, but that would be true whether the economys is good or bad.

You can't rule out the possibility that people will take to the streets and overwhelm the governments ability to control them.

What's stopping you and the twoof revolution from hitting the streets now?

 
At 03 February, 2010 15:18, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't discriminate between traffic cops and muslims when the revolution comes.

Just another adolescent acting out his Turn Diaries fantasy on the internet...

 
At 03 February, 2010 15:18, Anonymous Anonymous said...

*Turner Diaries

 
At 03 February, 2010 15:19, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Anonymous said...
I don't discriminate between traffic cops and muslims when the revolution comes."

So you're a wannabe murderous thug?

 
At 03 February, 2010 15:25, Anonymous paul w said...

Yeah, Kevin, blowing up planes and killing innocent men, women and children is a great leap forward to freedom.

Not to mention...

"maybe the rest of us should follow his example."

Maybe?

Jeebus, what is it about truthers and their 'maybes', 'possibly' 'what if', "could be', 'might have', 'appeared to be', 'sounded like', 'looked like', etc?

Fuck me drunk, they cannot commit themselves even when it's a call to arms.

As for truthjihad.com blog, what the fuck is this supposed to mean;

"The best jihad is a word of truth flung in the face of a tyrant."

Really?

Hmm. For some reason, I cannot imagine Stalin, Hitler, or Saddam reeling back in horror when confronted by someone telling them the 'truth'.

Truthers really are beyond parody, though I think Barrett is probably just getting high on his pathetic notion of celebrity.

Way to go, Kev. Right on, brother. Take it to the streets. Fight the power.

Maybe.

 
At 03 February, 2010 15:40, Anonymous Traffic Cop said...

" Anonymous said...
Unemployment is as bad today as it was at the height of the Great Depression"

Fucking retard!

Shitbags like you and that piece of crap roid rage are a huge part of why the future of this great country is at risk.

You lack of history knowledge is surpassed only by your COMPLETE lack of common sense.

Comparing what has happen to the economy over the past two years to the Great Depression was a ploy to get the current NWO puppet elected. It appears to have worked...

roid rage and his total lack of understanding of the Nazis and what they did and yet claiming his family were victims is just another example troofer stupidity

 
At 03 February, 2010 15:41, Anonymous Traffic Cop said...

"I don't discriminate between traffic cops and muslims when the revolution comes."

You're back? Good! I wasn't done with you yet.

 
At 03 February, 2010 15:48, Anonymous Traffic Cop said...

"PornBoy sure has thrown in the towel,eh TriteDopey? I'm sure even the hysterical Debunker Cult that he's motoring will acknowledge that he's "more inspirational than operational"! This moron has the intellectual scaffolding of a Hamburger University graduate"

This coming from a pussy not even qualified to carry Kevin Barrett's burka...

As much of a piece of shit lying scumbag Barrett is - at least he has the balls to at least talk about what you should be doing.

Walt's problem is he is too big of a pussy to actually do what any sane person would be doing if they believed only 10% of the crap he spews.

Instead he goes to the Oyster bar, sponges off the NYC Pulic Library system and think up cute names for every one. What a real winner you are!

 
At 03 February, 2010 15:57, Anonymous Dylan Unsavery said...

Treason!

Jon Gold : We Need A 9/11 News Site Run By Veterans of this movement.

Zombie Bill Hicks :But Im all for a new site. Thats all I need to jump ship..

Jon Gold: I want a site I don't mind sharing with other people. That site which shall remain nameless is an embarrassment to me. When I think of all of the work that made that site that shall remain nameless the most popular 9/11 Truth site on the planet, and then I look at it now... in its current condition, I get nausea.

Truthmover :It'll be up within the week if I can rally the troops.

Jon Gold :That site that shall remain nameless is a fucking embarassment. Everytime Syed posts it's a slap in the face to anyone who cares about credibility and justice.

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=27396589&postID=1068795479660899513

Are they talking about the esteemed 911 Flogger. Surely not.

 
At 03 February, 2010 16:03, Anonymous Damocles said...

I do worry sometimes that people like Barret's calls for action will be answered by the less stable.

As far as the economic crisis goes, it could have been as bad as the Great Depression if not for intervention by the Federal Reserve [cue wolf howl and thunder sound fx] that the anarchists are always whining about.
When they sensationalize unemployment they usually use the U6 numbers, which no other country in the world uses and counts "discouraged workers" IE people not working and not actively seeking a job. The U3 numbers only count unemployed people actively seeking employment; it only counts people competing for the jobs available right now. It's the international standard.
Neither U3 nor U6 are anywhere near Great Depression levels. Not to mention during the Great Depression there was no Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, Food Stamps, Unemployment Insurance, etc.
But if credulous people aren't scared shitless about impending catastrophe they wont by my latest DVD!

 
At 03 February, 2010 16:10, Blogger Triterope said...

I do worry sometimes that people like Barrett's calls for action will be answered by the less stable.

They are being answered by the less stable. Like this story from awhile back.

These idiots will never get an army together, but they will enable a lot of lone nuts into action.

 
At 03 February, 2010 16:35, Anonymous Bikerman said...

Here's a messiah for you

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqWtiAtSvg0&feature=player_embedded#


I was so disappointed that this was not a RickRoll.

 
At 03 February, 2010 17:55, Blogger angrysoba said...

If Anwar al-Awlaki really has taken up arms against the rogue regime that has overthrown the Constitution of the United States of America, maybe the rest of us should follow his example.

What the fuck is this?

Barrett:

Al-Awlaki is not a terrorist. The government's lying. And if he is a terrorist it will be justified cos the government lied about him being a terrorist. And we should be terrorists too just like al-Awlaki, who isn't a terrorist but if he is good on him.

 
At 03 February, 2010 18:12, Blogger angrysoba said...

Barrett: "One small problem with that conspiracy theory: Passenger Kurt Haskell has revealed that it was a US government agent who escorted the flaming-underwear patsy aboard Flight 253 without a passport. No wonder they don't want to bring al-Awlaki to trial. Haskell's testimony, and corroborating testimony from his fellow passengers, would prove that the flaming-underwear operation was an inside job."

What kind of idiotic Troofer-think is this?

How would anything Kurt Haskell says have any bearing on al-Awlaki?

Whereas Abdulmutallab is being brought to trial.

 
At 03 February, 2010 18:43, Anonymous Troofer dumbshit said...

I knew it!!!!

Proof the US is going to stage another attack on itself soon!

Intelligence Chiefs “Certain” Their Bosses Will Stage Terror Attack Soon

Contact the other person in your local truth group and stop this evil plot before it happens!!!

 
At 03 February, 2010 19:01, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Infowars also has links to stories saying that there will be a false flag at the Olympics, the Superbowl, and every other major event in the next five years. Just keep predicting terrorist attacks and when they happen, claim clairvoyance like Alex Jones. When they don't happen, no skin off his ass right? Maybe it was because he predicts them that the evil NWO decides to postpone their false flag attacks.

 
At 03 February, 2010 23:51, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Barrett was a parody of a twoofer for a long time. The last couple of years he's becomes a parody of himself.

He doesn't talk about 9/11 truth much anymore, thank god.

 
At 04 February, 2010 00:52, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thank God Barret isn't making Truthers look crazy. So far our reputation is one of rationalism and sanity.

 
At 04 February, 2010 09:35, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You base your opinion on the sanity of truthers on the antics of a very few disruptors and mental defectives.

 
At 04 February, 2010 10:56, Anonymous New Yorker said...

You base your opinion on the sanity of truthers on the antics of a very few disruptors and mental defectives.

Can you name me a single "truther" who isn't a "mental defective" or a complete charlatan, Brian?

The only sane people in the "truth" movement are doing it to make money off of the gullible.

 
At 04 February, 2010 11:52, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

"Can you name me a single "truther" who isn't a "mental defective" or a complete charlatan, Brian?"

Let me help you with that.

If by "truther" you mean people who think there was a criminal cover-up:

Anthony Schaffer?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Shaffer_%28intelligence_officer%29

41 U.S. Counter-Terrorism and Intelligence Agency Veterans Challenge the Official Account of 9/11 – Official Account of 9/11: "Terribly Flawed," "Laced with Contradictions," "a Joke," "a Cover-up"
May 18, 2009,
http://patriotsquestion911.com/Counterterrorism_Veterans.html

Or how about these 9/11 family members:
http://nyccan.org/signatories.php

How about John Feal?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0t5_sHMypXA

How about Frank Greening?
http://www.911myths.com/html/dr_frank_greening_bio.html

(Doesn't believe NIST's WTC 7 report)

But of course, you will need "truthers" to be people that think no plane hit the Pentagon and no muslim hijackers exist. You need them to be nutty stereotypes. There is nothing in between. There are only nuts. Even CIA veterans. Even counterterrorism experts. Even family members and first responders.

That's when SLC endorses Troy Sexton to stalk the family members.

 
At 04 February, 2010 11:56, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

Poor,poor pitiful Dickflicking Sock Puppet "Traffic Cop",you should try Joe's Pizza on Carmine St. too!! There's lines out the door at 3 AM on Tuesdays! Sorry about kicking your lame ass too many times,they were only "intermittent explosions".Anything at all on Shaffer? Didn't think so.Leave that one alone because it pretty well closes the match,and we're having too much arn fun with this charade! We admire your effort,though!

 
At 04 February, 2010 12:05, Anonymous New Yorker said...

If by "truther" you mean people who think there was a criminal cover-up:

Um, no, I don't mean that. By "truther", I mean the people who think the Bush administration was responsible for the attack, or at very least, knew about the attack and consciously failed to prevent it.

Try making your straw men a bit less obvious next time.

But of course, you will need "truthers" to be people that think no plane hit the Pentagon and no muslim hijackers exist.

Some of them do, but not all of them. What point are you trying to make?

Even CIA veterans. Even counterterrorism experts. Even family members and first responders.

Ah, I see, you're using the fallacy of appeal to authority (and including family members is really stretching it, since losing one's loved one in the WTC doesn't make one an expert on engineering or global politics).

Also, I don't endorse the stalking of people by anyone, "truther" or not.

So now that that you're done posting something pointless, can you please present some evidence that 9/11 was an inside job?

 
At 04 February, 2010 12:11, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Family members who lost loved ones are the least objective people possible. Their emotional trauma too often sends them on a pointless crusade. It's very sad that they let themselves be used and manipulated.
Exhibit A: Cindy Sheehan

 
At 04 February, 2010 12:15, Anonymous KrazeesDaycareProvider said...

I love that RR makes a post about how there are sane Truthers and it's immediately followed by one of Krazee's typically incoherent ramblings. Priceless.

 
At 04 February, 2010 12:17, Anonymous Traffic Cop said...

"Poor,poor pitiful Dickflicking Sock Puppet "Traffic Cop",you should try Joe's Pizza on Carmine St. too!! There's lines out the door at 3 AM on Tuesdays! Sorry about kicking your lame ass too many times,they were only "intermittent explosions".Anything at all on Shaffer? Didn't think so.Leave that one alone because it pretty well closes the match,and we're having too much arn fun with this charade! We admire your effort,though!"

Shaffer? "intermittent explosions"?

COURT Sport - take all your ass-kicking evidence to Court. Until then keep entertaining me.

 
At 04 February, 2010 13:08, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

"So now that that you're done posting something pointless, can you please present some evidence that 9/11 was an inside job?"

9/11 was not an "inside job". It was a convergence of two things: a muslim terrorist attack and treason by neoconservative hawks/CIA/military. Then followed a true inside job: the anthrax attacks.

"Truthers" don't have to believe that "Bush did 9/11". That's YOUR straw man. Like you said, you're framing a stereotype.

If you contest that the 9/11 commission was a cover-up, I will post evidence that it was.

Personally I feel the cover-up is covering up treason. Others may feel the cover-up is covering up failures.

Fine. But there is a cover-up.

 
At 04 February, 2010 13:09, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

Scuse me.

Like *I* said, you're framing a stereotype.

 
At 04 February, 2010 13:25, Anonymous ConsDemo said...

"...and treason by neoconservative hawks/CIA/military."

Exactly how did they commit "treason"?

"If you contest that the 9/11 commission was a cover-up, I will post evidence that it was."

Most the the assertions about the 9/11 commission being a "coverup" either 1) come from people who don't like the conclusions (i.e. it didn't say this evil rotten country attacked itself) or 2) is based on the people in involved (i.e. Zelikow), or is a quote mine (such as the quote from Hamilton). None of those are proof of a coverup, what do you have that is different?

 
At 04 February, 2010 13:59, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"9/11 was not an "inside job". It was a convergence of two things: a muslim terrorist attack and treason by neoconservative hawks/CIA/military."

Yeah, just another America hating nutter.

 
At 04 February, 2010 14:21, Anonymous New Yorker said...

9/11 was not an "inside job". It was a convergence of two things: a muslim terrorist attack and treason by neoconservative hawks/CIA/military.

Ah yes, "treason". Please explain your reasoning here, as I tend towards sympathy to the idea that the US had a right to strike back at those who attacked us.

Then followed a true inside job: the anthrax attacks.

You have evidence for this?

"Truthers" don't have to believe that "Bush did 9/11". That's YOUR straw man. Like you said, you're framing a stereotype.

False.

If you contest that the 9/11 commission was a cover-up, I will post evidence that it was.

Please do. This should be pretty entertaining.

Personally I feel the cover-up is covering up treason.

That's nice. You're aware that the Constitution has a specific definition of treason, regardless of what you "feel", correct?

 
At 04 February, 2010 14:58, Anonymous Henry Kissinger said...

If you contest that the 9/11 commission was a cover-up, I will post evidence that it was.
The 9/11 commission was not a cover-up.

 
At 04 February, 2010 15:44, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

Ah yes, "treason". Please explain your reasoning here, as I tend towards sympathy to the idea that the US had a right to strike back at those who attacked us.

I don't get you here. The attack should have been prevented easily.

"You have evidence for this?"

If Ivins had neither the equipment or skills to weaponize anthrax with silicon, then some other party with access to the anthrax must have done it. Even before these startling results, Sen. Leahy had told Director Mueller, "I do not believe in any way, shape, or manner that [Ivins] is the only person involved in this attack on Congress."

— Wall Street Journal, 24 January 2010

False.

Bare assertion fallacy.

---------------------------------------

"Please do. This should be pretty entertaining."

Thank you. I've been working hard "quote mining" for the occasion. Sigh. Nice anticipatory denial, whoever it was.

Senator Accuses Bush of Cover-Up

Note that I regard cover-up activities as impeachable and criminal offenses. Perhaps you disagree.

Report: much of 9/11 Commission’s findings cite intelligence garnered by torture

Information garnered by torture is (A) useless and (B) illegal. Those involved in torture should be tried

Chairman Thomas Kean says that the CIA intentionally impeded the 9/11 Commission's investigation and says “I’m upset that [the government] didn’t tell us the truth.”

Co-chair Hamilton says of the CIA's cover up and destruction of tapes of interrogation of people allegedly connected with 9/11:

"Did they obstruct our inquiry? The answer is clearly yes," says Lee Hamilton, who co-chaired the 9/11 Commission, in the wake of reports the CIA destroyed videotapes of interrogations of two al-Qaida suspects. "Whether that amounts to a crime, others will have to judge," adds Hamilton.

Former 9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland resigned from the Commission, stating: "It is a national scandal"; "This investigation is now compromised"; and "One of these days we will have to get the full story because the 9-11 issue is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it up".

The commission ignored whistleblowers such as Sibel Edmonds, Anthony Schaffer, Coleen Rowley. The commission was underfunded and understaffed. The commission wouldn't have been there if it wasn't for the Jersey Girls, among others. Bush tried to appoint Henry Kissinger until he forced not to by 9/11 family members. Bush and Cheney testified together in secret. Zelikow was the executive director, co-authored a book with Condoleezza Rice, and was involved in Bush's transition team. He maintained contact with Karl Rove during the investigation. He had already written the outline and the basic narrative of the report before work even commenced.

Then there's NORAD considered for persecution

Et cetera, et cetera.

Failure or intentional, there was a cover-up.

 
At 04 February, 2010 15:58, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Note that I regard cover-up activities as impeachable and criminal offenses. Perhaps you disagree.
What you or I regard as criminal is irrelevant. What matters is established law.

 
At 04 February, 2010 16:02, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"False.

Bare assertion fallacy."

False.

He's stating a fact.

 
At 04 February, 2010 16:05, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

The Raw Story is a far left propaganda site, FYI.

 
At 04 February, 2010 16:09, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

What you or I regard as criminal is irrelevant. What matters is established law.

Enlighten me. Is lying to the 9/11 commission a criminal offense? Should a
president or any member of his administration, tampering with an official investigation, be prosecuted? What does law establish? Sources please. I welcome constructive contributions like that.

 
At 04 February, 2010 16:11, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

"The Raw Story is a far left propaganda site, FYI."

False.

 
At 04 February, 2010 16:11, Anonymous Anonymous said...

All of this looks like people covering up:
A. Embarrassing connections to our "allies"
B. Information that would compromise ongoing clandestine operations
C. utter incompetence
The government has every right to cover up B. Covering up A is less excusable but expected. Covering up C is inexcusable but hardly surprising.
There is nothing here proving or even suggesting that the Bush administration deliberately allowed 9/11 to take place.
But yes, the commission probably covered some things up. They also omitted any mention of Israel as a motivating factor for Osama Bin Laden and Al Queda, a subject about which they routinely complain.

 
At 04 February, 2010 16:14, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Enlighten me.
I'm just complaining about semantics. Lying to congress is a crime and an impeachable offense, just ask Bill Clinton.
You just shouldn't phrase things as your opinion. Make positive statements instead.
I'm nitpicking, I know.

 
At 04 February, 2010 16:54, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

I don't know about you, but I don't subdivide into excusable and inexcusable cover-ups...

 
At 04 February, 2010 17:10, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Covering up clandestine operations is not covering up crime (usually). Its protecting our agents and assets.
Of course it could be argued that these operations are illegal and that our agents and their assets are breaking the law, but if we can't trust our own security services then we're really screwed as a country.

 
At 04 February, 2010 18:44, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Roid Rage said...
"The Raw Story is a far left propaganda site, FYI."

False."

True.

You cited it.

"Roid Rage said...
I don't know about you, but I don't subdivide into excusable and inexcusable cover-ups..."

You wouldn't.

With you everything is black and black.

 
At 04 February, 2010 19:05, Anonymous New Yorker said...

So we still don't have anything that's evidence of a deliberate act to allow 9/11 to happen, huh? No treason? How about that.

Jesus Roid Rage, you're expecting us to be shocked and outraged by government incompetence? Are you one of those guys who sobbed yourself to sleep over Mark McGwire admitting using steroids? But he seemed so honest when he denied it!

 
At 04 February, 2010 19:10, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

"True."

False.

"You cited it."

True.

 
At 04 February, 2010 19:18, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

"So we still don't have anything that's evidence of a deliberate act to allow 9/11 to happen, huh? No treason? How about that."

Moving the goal posts? I said I would provide evidence for a cover-up, nothing more.

Seeing from your reaction you can't even take that seriously... I shouldn't be surprised. A cover up? No problem. Okay, that's an eye opener.

 
At 04 February, 2010 19:51, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Stop being Naive and go read some Machiavelli.

 
At 04 February, 2010 21:18, Anonymous New Yorker said...

Moving the goal posts? I said I would provide evidence for a cover-up, nothing more.

Leaving aside exactly what was being covered up, I asked you for evidence of an inside job or LIHOP at least.

Hey, if you want to start a crusade to make government more accountable and effective, sign me up. If you want to investigate whether thermite was the mechanism that brought down the towers, or was just the trigger for other explosives (and this is something the vast majority of "truthers" are wedded to), you're on your own.

 
At 04 February, 2010 22:10, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

Haven't you ever wondered what the hell was going on with Ali Mohamed? Much of which happened under Clinton, BTW.

Who infiltrated who? Did Ali Mohamed infiltrate the CIA, FBI and the green berets?

This was the guy who coached the terrrrists, ya know.

 
At 04 February, 2010 22:23, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

"Stop being Naive and go read some Machiavelli."

Stop being presumptuous. I own "Il Principe".

The "eye-opener" part was in reference to the lukewarm deprecation of cover-ups in general here. My indignation is simply on another scale entirely. Knowing evil doesn't really change that. I despise these eggheads in suits, who make a career out of spin and betrayal at the cost of honorable men and women. Who enrich themselves and don't give a fuck about the 9/11 first responders, for example. The elite Washingtonian circle jerk. The rubber spines and the double agendas. Who pervert science, whether it be global warming, stem cell research, or e.g. ASCE's corrupt Katrina inquiry.

 
At 04 February, 2010 23:12, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You have a copy of The Prince? You're definitely my second favorite poster now. NYer is still my first, I have a total crush on him.

 
At 05 February, 2010 12:24, Anonymous ConsDemo said...

the commission probably covered some things up. They also omitted any mention of Israel as a motivating factor for Osama Bin Laden and Al Queda, a subject about which they routinely complain.

That isn't a problem for just the 9/11 commission. A good chunk of the US foreign policy intelligentsia in denial about what a liability our "alliance" with Israel is to this country.

 
At 06 February, 2010 05:33, Anonymous sackcloth and ashes said...

Roid Rage, instead of just indulging in insinuations, would you care to outline your own version of what happened on 9/11, using the evidence at hand to back up your case?

 
At 06 February, 2010 05:36, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"sackcloth and ashes said...
Roid Rage, instead of just indulging in insinuations, would you care to outline your own version of what happened on 9/11, using the evidence at hand to back up your case?"

He HAS no case.

 
At 06 February, 2010 08:45, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

"Roid Rage, instead of just indulging in insinuations, would you care to outline your own version of what happened on 9/11, using the evidence at hand to back up your case?"

If you are used to 'truthers' stating speculation as fact, then I don't think it strange that you demand me to behave like the choir. But I won't. A cover-up is outrageous. A cover-up is a conspiracy to lie. A conspiracy to lie about 9/11 is very, very, very unacceptable, as is any cover up, especially involving mass murder.

"He HAS no case."
Do too, Dorothy. I have you, the bellicose, ultra-nationalist, flag sucking basket case!

 
At 06 February, 2010 10:34, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

Well, Raging Bullshit, let me break this to you gently.

I'd rather be an America loving flag-sucker than an America hating cock-sucker like you.

 
At 06 February, 2010 11:38, Anonymous sackcloth and ashes said...

'If you are used to 'truthers' stating speculation as fact, then I don't think it strange that you demand me to behave like the choir. But I won't. A cover-up is outrageous. A cover-up is a conspiracy to lie. A conspiracy to lie about 9/11 is very, very, very unacceptable, as is any cover up, especially involving mass murder.'

Roid Rage, this is not a trick question. If you are so confident of the extent of your research and your background knowledge that you can decisively rebut what truthers call 'the official story', and refer to the evidence at hand to do so, then this is the time and this is the place to do so.

This is an opportunity to take advantage of the 8 years and 4 months which truthers have had to gather the evidence which disproves the mainstream understanding of what took place on 11th September 2001, and to outline what really happened - be it LIHOP or MIHOP. I am genuinely open-minded enough for you to outline your 'theory' - provided, of course, that you can substantiate it.

So here it is, RR. This is your chance to tell me if:

(1) Al Qaeda was responsible for the hijackings/suicide attacks on 9/11, and (if not)

(2) Why four airliners got hijacked.

(3) What brought down the three WTC towers.

(4) What hit the Pentagon, and

(5) What the objectives of the 'real' plotters (as opposed to OBL, Zawahiri, KSM et al) were, and

(6) How you can actually prove this alternative thesis.

The floor is yours. Take your time.

 
At 06 February, 2010 14:14, Anonymous NoIdentity said...

(1) Al Qaeda was responsible for the hijackings/suicide attacks on 9/11, and (if not)

It was Al Qaeda.

(2) Why four airliners got hijacked.

To crash them into the WTC, the Pentagon, and probably the Capitol. The last one failed thank God.

(3) What brought down the three WTC towers.

See answer to #2

(4) What hit the Pentagon, and

A cloaked ship using reverse engineered alien techno- wait. See #2

(5) What the objectives of the 'real' plotters (as opposed to OBL, Zawahiri, KSM et al) were, and

AQ wanted us to invade their godforsaken lands so they could fight us on their turf and force us to waste trillions of dollars accomplishing nothing while at the same time convincing the Islamic masses that the United States and the West had declared war on all of Islam, sending their recruiting numbers way up.

(6) How you can actually prove this alternative thesis.

We have invaded their godforsaken lands, they're fighting us on their turf, we're wasting trillions of dollars accomplishing very little, have convinced the Islamic masses that we're at war with the entire Dar Al Islam, and AQ wannabes seem to be doing pretty well with recruitment.
With that said I don't want to downplay the accomplishments of our armed forces. We did wipe out most of the original Al Queda in Afghanistan but now we're stuck spreading "democracy" to the most authoritarian culture in the world while Al Queda is reconstituting itself all over the place.

 
At 06 February, 2010 15:41, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

"The floor is yours. Take your time."

I think you may have some misconceptions about where I'm coming from. I know a whole lot, but basically I see a whole lot of contradictions. I'm "on the fence" on a lot of issues. I'll make it brief.

(1) Al Qaeda was responsible for the hijackings/suicide attacks on 9/11, and (if not)
Al Qaeda was responsible, together with a whole network of intelligence tied facilitators. It's difficult to determine who infiltrated who, but this group was infiltrated and monitored thoroughly.

(2) Why four airliners got hijacked.
Too many possibilities to mention. I think it conceivable that this was achieved by the terrorists, but I have my doubts about flight 77 (transponder off? bumbling pilot?) and flight 93 (Why still hijacked after receiving warning?)

(3) What brought down the three WTC towers.
1 & 2: collapse initiation: I'd say a 30% chance that (nano-)thermite was involved in this phase. I deem natural collapse initiation quite probable.
1 & 2: collapse progression: I'd say a 50% chance of explosives involved.
7: 80% chance controlled demolition, primarily due to 2.25 s freefall acceleration. Like John Feal said..."if I was a betting man.."

I can explain most truther anamolies away, but I can't explain the chips and the spheres, I can't explain the extremely high temperatures and I can't explain the explosions. They were not just deodorant cans and generators popping. Bazant was proven wrong by both Szamboti and Mackey. The NIST reports contain things I agree with, but other key areas are deliberately falsified or ignored.

(4) What hit the Pentagon, and
100% a commercial aircraft, quite probably flight aa 77, with all the passengers. Anything else is straight up idiotic.

(5) What the objectives of the 'real' plotters (as opposed to OBL, Zawahiri, KSM et al) were, and
OBL, KSM were involved. But 9/11 was a pretext. It comes down to cold war rivalry and resource theft. The world is in a hidden energy crisis, especially Europe and the US. The war/oil admnistration knew this. They were also afraid of nuclear proliferation among terrorists and sought ways to implement a national security state to help protect America. However, power corrupts, and craves more power. The national security state is an affront to human dignity and Western values. I'd rather be insecure and free than secure and a prisoner.

(6) How you can actually prove this alternative thesis.
I can't. Justice will never be served, the truth will never come to light. It's a matter of psychology. I'm sure we both agree on that last point. There is close to zero chance I'll ever believe an alien story, I'm sure you regard this as such.

Possibly the anthrax case might open Pandora's box. I doubt that, given the cowardly weasel Obama is.

Point is, I don't understand the lack of outrage among you and others (LL is hopeless) about the cover up. So what if it was just massive incompetence? That still deserves scrutiny.

And these buildings...for the sake of science I want a real investigation, and I want it to properly account for all evidence. No more hack science cover ups with embarrassing, humiliating presentations by liar Sunder and his team of sly and patient con artists. I don't give a rat's ass if it was a CD or not, I want sincerity in science. What the hell happened?

 
At 06 February, 2010 16:01, Anonymous NoIdentity said...

How the hell can you possible think that the North and South towers were brought down by anything other than the transcontinental airliners with full tanks of jet fuel that smashed into them at several hundred miles an hour?
The South tower collapsed into the corner where the jet struck. How the hell could a controlled demolition simulate that unless the planners knew EXACTLY where the jet was going to impact?
I'll concede that building 7 is much less obvious as no planes hit it. But the giant towers collapsed exactly how they would be expected to.
It comes down to cold war rivalry and resource theft.
Google "Gorbachev" and "berlin wall" please.
Afghanistan is a lost cause. There is not going to be a trans-afghan pipeline, period, end of story. There is no gas for it and there is no safe route for it. The Chinese beat us to it.
Why didn't we frame Saddam for 9-11 instead of the Taliban who only control a near useless country like Afghanistan?
The world is in a hidden energy crisis, especially Europe and the US.
Finally a point of agreement! Although I'd argue that it's hardly hidden now that Oil prices reflect the real supply and demand situation. I'm sure the government will continue to blame greedy price gouging oil companies.
They were also afraid of nuclear proliferation among terrorists and sought ways to implement a national security state to help protect America.
So they would deliberately kill 3,000 Americans but they're afraid of nuclear proliferation among the terrorist networks they supposedly control?
Point is, I don't understand the lack of outrage among you and others (LL is hopeless) about the cover up.
This is a good point. Personally I think the cover-ups were of "legitimate" clandestine operations in Central Asia. (Part of that energy war you were talking about) If there were cover-ups of incompetence that is outrageous but hardly comparable to a cover up of malicious intent by the government to murder its own citizens. This site focuses on claims about malicious intent.
I'm glad at least that you saw through Obama's hope and change nonsense. The rest of the anti-war movement seems to have died off.

 
At 06 February, 2010 18:10, Blogger Triterope said...

There is not going to be a trans-afghan pipeline, period, end of story. There is no gas for it and there is no safe route for it.

Yeah, really.

The DURR AFGHANISTAN PIPELINE DURR argument has always amused me. There's no oil in Afghanistan, Afghanistan would be of no strategic value to a pipeline from somewhere that did have oil, and Afghanistan has been historically difficult to control. Even by the Afghani government.
fOR CRY

 
At 06 February, 2010 18:18, Blogger Triterope said...

For cryin' out loud, Iraq borders Turkey, a Muslim country with which the U.S. has decent relations. And supposedly the motivation for the Iraq war was also DURR OIL DURR.

If this was really about oil, it would be easy to run it from Iraq through Turkey. Running it through Afghanistan from... apparently, some country the U.S. hasn't invaded yet... requires it to also go through Iran, or a combination of at least three unstable former Soviet republics.

These DURR WAR FOR OIL DURR idiots should look at a map sometime.

 
At 07 February, 2010 06:21, Anonymous sackcloth and ashes said...

I am glad to see that RR is actually man enough to admit that he has no proof at all to back up his fatuous assertions. I am only sorry that he's not smart enough to realise that this means that he has no case.

 
At 08 February, 2010 00:36, Anonymous Brian Good said...

Good post, RR! Followed by fluff from fluffers.

 
At 08 February, 2010 10:08, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

Poor,poor pitiful NY,er! If the anthrax could only have come from Fort Dietrich and....ah,fuck it,you can lead a horse to water but...aww,just chuck it!

 
At 08 February, 2010 10:54, Anonymous sackcloth and ashes said...

'S&A: How you can actually prove this alternative thesis.

RR: I can't.'

Just about says it all, really.

 
At 08 February, 2010 15:58, Anonymous NoIdentity said...

1 & 2: collapse initiation: I'd say a 30% chance that (nano-)thermite was involved in this phase. I deem natural collapse initiation quite probable.
1 & 2: collapse progression: I'd say a 50% chance of explosives involved.

I'd love to hear your explanation as to how you thinks there is a 30% chance the North and South towers were brought down by explosives. We've already heard petgoat's thoroughly entertaining explanation involving radio homing beacons and Christmas-tree lights.
Also, as far as the collapse progression goes, why is the momentum from thousands of tons of steel and concrete moving not enough to destroy the entire structure?
As Newton demonstrated
Force = Mass * Acceleration. If the mass in question is massive (say, a quarter of one of the worlds largest sky scrapers) if it accelerates even slightly the force it generates is tremendous, easily enough to overwhelm the structural integrity of the building beneath it.

 
At 11 February, 2010 10:21, Anonymous Anonymous said...

William Rodriguez said...Kevin's my boy.

Yeah, Willie, I always wondered about that. I'd noticed that Kevin really started going off the rails after he went on tour with you. And I'd always wondered why a talented salesman like you spent the Clinton prosperity hiding in a stairwell. I wondered if the stairwell job was a cover for ABM security work, like in union busting maybe. The skills you'd learn there would help you manipulate the truth movement. And help you manipulate Barrett.

 
At 12 February, 2010 10:38, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

Poor Sackschnook,manning his bar stool and hallucinating every few hours.This time he's imagining that discussion boards are actual Courts of Law and he's the presiding Judge! Snap out of it Lager Lout.You've been relegated to arguing the ludicrous Coincidently Incompetent Feds theory.A theory that is impossible but well loved by loonies like yourself.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home