Wednesday, February 10, 2010

New 9/11 Photos Released

Responding to a FOIA request by ABC News the NIST has release several thousand photos 9/11 that they collected as part of their investigation. A few of them have been posted on the web.

Not surprisingly the nutters are now claiming that this is some sort of success for them. And here I thought the mainstream media was part of the coverup.


Wow, if that first photo isn't a "smoking gun"

71 Comments:

At 10 February, 2010 17:43, Blogger Billman said...

Yep, that looks just like a "wet camp fire" to me.

 
At 10 February, 2010 17:51, Anonymous paul w said...

Some comments made at 911blogger:

"The original hirez digital images will not have a NYPD watermark and should contain important embedded EXIF info. How much more is NIST still hiding? How high the moon? How big is 28 trillion?"

"Funny how pancaked buildings create a sea of cauliflower-shaped dust clouds just like planned demolitions. The aerial shots are unbelievable. Any fool can see that Ground Zero was blown apart and pulverized..

"It produced pyroclastic-like dust clouds and pools of molten steel flowing like lava from a volcano. Was THIS one of Silverstein's buildings too? LOL"

"What crap. I guess the preps own that rag also. Here is another link I just spotted on Yahoo. More BS. Boy they are really pushing the "Official Story". I think they are getting a little scared."

"Lets keep putting the heat on. They are bound to crack. All our hard work is starting to pay off."

"Wow, if that first photo isn't a "smoking gun" I don't know what is..."

"I think it obvious to us here why- it's the exact opposite of those few Pentagon frames... Such crystal clear detail."

"...the N. Tower didn't topple over and hit Building 7. Lateral ejections of material did, which contradicts pancaking by definition. In this sense, 7 is a smoking gun for the very fact that it was damaged--- in addition to it being a controlled demolition itself."

Hilarious.

 
At 10 February, 2010 18:13, Anonymous NoIdentiy said...

I really get sick of the passive aggressive tone. "Isn't it interesting that... " "funny how..." and my favorite is when they end with "Hmmmmm."
And pyro-clastic flow means a liquid is involved. The steam from volcanoes condenses and mixes with ash. Is it Pat who lives in the Puget Sound? I bet he knows what pyro-clastic flows look like!
A dust cloud is particulate matter suspended in a gas (like air). Do these guys listen to themselves?
These photos are really dramatic. Even after watching 9-11 videos hundreds of times, it still gives me goosebumps to see the entirety of lower Manhattan engulfed in a cloud of debris.

 
At 10 February, 2010 18:15, Anonymous paul w said...

OT, but while the comedy is strong, the idiots at 911oz are fighting (again) about the Pentagon.

"John, we dont need no stinking host. Just you and me my friend. You think the debate with Craig was tough? Ours will be over in less than 15 mins and you will feel like a wet-dish-rag after. Anytime you're ready tough guy..."

Wow. Maybe he'll rip him a new orifice, as well?

Then again, why don't they just get over it, and go hire a motel room?

Oh yeah, the also have a pilot for the first WeAreChange TV show. Not watched it yet.

http://www.911oz.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=6704

 
At 10 February, 2010 18:25, Anonymous New Yorker said...

Pay no attention to the orange glow that stretches from end to end of WTC 1 in that first photo. It's just the neon orange carpeting that had been installed by Marsh & McLennan. Needless to say, it's smoldering and causing the smoke.

 
At 10 February, 2010 18:46, Anonymous Anonymous said...

How long did that orange glow burn there, NY? NIST says office fires burn at most 20 minutes in any particular area before morving on for a new source of fuel.

 
At 10 February, 2010 18:55, Anonymous paul w said...

Ah, the fire.

"Curiously, a recorded radio transmission from Fire Chief Orio Palmer, who was on an upper floor of the south tower, indicated that just two hose lines would be needed to put out two isolated pockets of fire: 'We should be able to knock it down with two lines', he said. Just a few moments later the building disintegrated."

"I'm sure we can all agree that this was certainly not due to jet fuel fires of any kind, let alone the briefly burning fires in those towers."
Kevin R Ryan (Site Manager at Environmental Health Laboratories).

http://www.911oz.com/links/dummies/2

I'm sure they'll remove these comments, and others, once they've seen the pictures.

They're only after the truth, after all.

 
At 10 February, 2010 18:56, Blogger James B. said...

Heh, my favorite new comment.

Can we FOIA ABC News to release ALL the photos? We should act fast so they don't have time to touch any up like Time did after buying the Zigroder film.

 
At 10 February, 2010 19:20, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"NIST says office fires burn at most 20 minutes in any particular area before morving on for a new source of fuel."


No they don't

Look at the fucking pictures, brian.

You fucking retarded marmoset.

 
At 10 February, 2010 19:28, Anonymous New Yorker said...

How long did that orange glow burn there, NY?

From about 8:46 to about 10:28 AM, numbnuts. After that, it burned for almost 3 months in a different location.

NIST says office fires burn at most 20 minutes in any particular area before morving on for a new source of fuel.

Yup, and photographic evidence suggests the fire spread upwards, which I'm sure made it less likely that the steel would weaken, or something.

I dunno, Brian, can you try making a point here? I'm a bit lost as to what your gibberish is supposed to be getting at.

 
At 10 February, 2010 19:30, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Can we FOIA ABC News to release ALL the photos?"

brian comments over there, too?

 
At 10 February, 2010 20:03, Anonymous New Yorker said...

Yep, that looks just like a "wet camp fire" to me.

This comment makes me realize how unbelievably asinine Brian's desperate grasping of the "20 minutes in one place" straw is. Anyone who has ever built a campfire would know that the fuel (firewood) burns out pretty quickly: you need to keep adding to the fire. What doesn't happen is that the consumed fuel goes cold immediately. Instead, as long as there is more fuel to be added and plenty of ventilation, the base of the fire grows hotter and hotter until it's glowing bright orange.

Funny, we see a bright orange glow at the base of the fire in WTC, where the fuel would have already been consumed.

Now, I wouldn't expect Brian to know how to maintain a campfire since going on a camping trip requires that Brian a) have friends and b) leave his parents' house occasionally, but it's still a nice indication of how unbelievably desperate he is to keep the 9/11 "truth" narrative going in his diseased mind.

Please see a psychiatrist, Brian.

 
At 10 February, 2010 20:40, Anonymous Chet Ripley said...

"...but it's still a nice indication of how unbelievably desperate he is to keep the 9/11 "truth" narrative going in his diseased mind."

diseased mind! Too fucking funny!!! And true

 
At 10 February, 2010 23:58, Anonymous John E. Smoke said...

"Lets keep putting the heat on. They are bound to crack. All our hard work is starting to pay off."

Now that's funny. These fruits actually think they're doing something.

 
At 11 February, 2010 00:56, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

"Now that's funny. These fruits actually think they're doing something."

Yeah, I mean like.... passively responding to 911blogger with lame prevarications is really constructive.

 
At 11 February, 2010 01:32, Anonymous Spud1k said...

The only reason the crazies seem to think this is some kind of victory is that they've already convinced themselves that everything that actually happened was indicative of CD, so any new picture is a 'smoking gun' for them. But some of them really give lie to a lot of their previous drivel. Small, isolated fires? Don't think so. Neatly and into their own footprint? Uhhhhh... no. And what do you know? Some of that debris looks like it might have hit building seven. Imagine the damage that might cause!

Mind you, they're still pretty spectacular images that capture the mind-boggling scale of it all really well.

 
At 11 February, 2010 05:43, Blogger Boris Epstein said...

Yes, the mainstream media most certainly have been, and still are, contributing to the coverup. It is simply that they can't hold out forever without losing the minimal credibility they need to survive.

There tactics have been those of obfuscation, delay and selective coverage, among others. And they did have some success - hopefully, only temporary.

 
At 11 February, 2010 05:58, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Roid Rage said...
"Now that's funny. These fruits actually think they're doing something."

Yeah, I mean like.... passively responding to 911blogger with lame prevarications is really constructive."

Um, no, you elbow licking retard, it's up to insane conspiracy loons like you to provce your so called "theories".

We have reality on our side.

You have insanity.


"Boris Epstein said...
Yes, the mainstream media most certainly have been, and still are, contributing to the coverup."

Prove it, you retarded marmoset.

 
At 11 February, 2010 06:39, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

"You have insanity."

Yeah yeah. You're a real repetitive yawner, anal acrobat of the traveling bunktard circus.

 
At 11 February, 2010 07:19, Anonymous ConsDemo said...

Because many sane people want to avoid discussing 9/11, either because they've said all they want to say or are displeased with what the US did after the attacks, the conspiratoids are a disproportionate share of the commenters in the CNN
message board. Its environments such as this that give the kooks the impression they are the majority. Myself and few others have been setting them straight but a few more voices for sanity would be welcome!

 
At 11 February, 2010 07:20, Anonymous ConsDemo said...

It is simply that they can't hold out forever without losing the minimal credibility they need to survive.

Bore-ass, no one in media gives one rat's ass about your opinion.

 
At 11 February, 2010 07:39, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Roid Rage said...
"You have insanity."

Yeah yeah. You're a real repetitive yawner, anal acrobat of the traveling bunktard circus."

Me: 'Um, no, you elbow licking retard, it's up to insane conspiracy loons like you to prove your so called "theories".'

The truth stings, eh conspiritard?

BTW, the vein in your forehead is throbbing again.

Go take your meds and have a nice long nap, 'mkay?

 
At 11 February, 2010 08:08, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

The truth stings, eh conspiritard?

BTW, the vein in your forehead is throbbing again.

Go take your meds and have a nice long nap, 'mkay?"


Yawn.

Lazarus, you need to take a sabbatical. You're increasingly boring and repetitive.

 
At 11 February, 2010 09:10, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Lazarus, you need to take a sabbatical. You're increasingly boring and repetitive."

And you're an insane truther.


So, I'm gonna keep on laughing at you, you pathetic mook.

 
At 11 February, 2010 09:42, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Again, off topic but interesting:

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/02/11/heartache-tea-party-candidate-in-texas-a-911-truther/

 
At 11 February, 2010 10:13, Anonymous Anonymous said...

NY, how do you know the fire burned at that location from 8:46 to 10:28? I think you're making up your facts.

NIST says the fires burn out in any given location in 20 minutes.

I have built more campfires than anyone I know; I used wood heat in more than one of my homes. Your invocation of the coals in a campfire is illegitimate because the campfire fuel is added to the same place. NIST says the fires move on to new places for new fuel. Your coals therefore cool down.

You make up your facts, NY. That's called living in a fantasy world. A very dull one, by the way.

 
At 11 February, 2010 10:42, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Anonymous said...
NY, how do you know the fire burned at that location from 8:46 to 10:28? I think you're making up your facts."

No, brian, you're just crazy.

It's a fact.

"NIST says the fires burn out in any given location in 20 minutes."

No, they don't.

"I have built more campfires than anyone I know; I used wood heat in more than one of my homes. Your invocation of the coals in a campfire is illegitimate because the campfire fuel is added to the same place. NIST says the fires move on to new places for new fuel. Your coals therefore cool down."

HAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA!!!!!!!!

That's to stupid even to mock.

 
At 11 February, 2010 10:44, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/ABPub/zoom/html/2011032772.html

So, brian, did this "traveling fire" take the elevators or the stairs?

Oh, nevermind.

You should never take the elevator in a fire.

Or a fire in an elevator, for that matter.

 
At 11 February, 2010 10:46, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

This should work better for the photo:

http://tinyurl.com/yzztkkf

 
At 11 February, 2010 11:18, Anonymous ConsDemo said...

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/02/11/heartache-tea-party-candidate-in-texas-a-911-truther/

Stupid bitch just saw her political career go down the drain. Of course she denies she is a twoofer tries to turn it into a free speech issue but she knows damn well it isn't.

 
At 11 February, 2010 14:17, Anonymous New Yorker said...

Yes, the mainstream media most certainly have been, and still are, contributing to the coverup.

Right, like they covered up Watergate and Iran-Contra and Lewinsky (all of which pale in comparison to the supposed crime committed here).

NY, how do you know the fire burned at that location from 8:46 to 10:28?

Because the plane hit at 8:46 and the tower collapsed at 10:28. This is not difficult to grasp, Petgoat.

I think you're making up your facts.

You also think NIST said the towers came down "essentially in free-fall". Nobody cares what you think because you're an ignorant lunatic.

NIST says the fires burn out in any given location in 20 minutes.

That's nice.

I have built more campfires than anyone I know. I used wood heat in more than one of my homes.

Boy, who didn't see this coming from Mr. "I knew what QED meant when I was 6 years old"? Nobody cares, Petgoat.

Your invocation of the coals in a campfire is illegitimate because the campfire fuel is added to the same place. NIST says the fires move on to new places for new fuel. Your coals therefore cool down.

False, true (and so what?), and ridiculously, unbelievably false.

You make up your facts, NY. That's called living in a fantasy world. A very dull one, by the way.

Seek professional help, Petgoat.

 
At 11 February, 2010 14:26, Anonymous Willie Rodriguez said...

"I have built more campfires than anyone I know"

Those voices in your head named Snug.Bug, petgoat, punxsutawneybarney, and contrivance don't count as people, Brian.

 
At 11 February, 2010 16:46, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

"And you're an insane truther.

So, I'm gonna keep on laughing at you, you pathetic mook."


Yawn + facepalm.

 
At 11 February, 2010 17:10, Blogger Triterope said...

Roid Rage said...

Yeah yeah. You're a real repetitive yawner, anal acrobat of the traveling bunktard circus.

Lazarus Long said...

Go take your meds and have a nice long nap, 'mkay?

Roid Rage said...

"Lazarus, you need to take a sabbatical. You're increasingly boring and repetitive."

Lazarus Long said...

You're an insane truther.

Roid Rage said...

Yawn + facepalm.


I can settle this. You both suck.

 
At 11 February, 2010 17:26, Blogger Billman said...

Yes, the mainstream media most certainly have been, and still are, contributing to the coverup.

Ok, first off... based on what evidence? Your insane speculation?

Second, THE SAME MEDIA that exposed the Clinton blowjob scandal? A GUY CAN'T EVEN GET A BLOWJOB IN THE PRIVACY OF THE OVAL FUCKING OFFICE without the media finding out about it, and yet they will WILLINGLY coverup an "inside job" to murder 3000 americans?

Third, you don't think that any one of the media organizations at the time would turn on each other in a heartbeat to expose the other for helping to cover this up? IMMUNITY for coming forward would help allieviate any fears you think they would have for refusing to so far.

Fourth, you don't understand the media of that time period. THEY WOULD NOT HELP BUSH IN ANY WAY. The Bush Administation repeatedly punished reporters who asked uncomfortable questions by placing them in the back of the conference room. This eventually led to a lot of people in the media looking for ANYTHING to bash the administration with (perfect example, the Cheney hunting incident. Look how far that simple accident got overblown by the pissed-off-at-the-administration-media. Another factor was how poorly Cheney's people handled it and the fact that they TRIED TO COVER IT UP and were caught!!!), they would have CRUCIFIED BUSH ALIVE before they'd ever have been "in on a coverup."

Read a fucking book or something other than infowars. Holy shit.

It is simply that they can't hold out forever without losing the minimal credibility they need to survive.

RIGHT NOW, just try to name one "credible" media outlet. CNN? MSNBC? FOX news? C'mon...

Credibility my ass. The fucking Daily Show is more credible than other news outlets right now.

There tactics have been those of obfuscation, delay and selective coverage, among others. And they did have some success - hopefully, only temporary.

9 plus years is "temporary?" Ok then...

 
At 11 February, 2010 17:45, Anonymous Roid Rage. said...

"I can settle this. You both suck."

Thanks. That means a lot to me, because that means you both despise me, and I would want it no other way.

 
At 11 February, 2010 17:55, Anonymous NoIdentity said...

Credibility my ass. The fucking Daily Show is more credible than other news outlets right now.
I think Jon Stewart knows this and is horrified by it. I find it amusing. From behind the shield of humor one is freer to criticize. I'm not sure who owns Comedy Central, but I'm guessing it's not Rupert Murdoch.

 
At 11 February, 2010 17:57, Blogger Billman said...

I'm not sure who owns Comedy Central, but I'm guessing it's not Rupert Murdoch.

Viacom owns it, I do believe. Which is.. Paramount and CBS and Nickelodeon, and bunch of other stuff.

 
At 11 February, 2010 18:01, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

"Second, THE SAME MEDIA that exposed the Clinton blowjob scandal? A GUY CAN'T EVEN GET A BLOWJOB IN THE PRIVACY OF THE OVAL FUCKING OFFICE without the media finding out about it, and yet they will WILLINGLY coverup an "inside job" to murder 3000 americans?"

Excellent and interesting point. Do you know why? First, it's not even in the same ballpark as 9/11, and it limits the damage to one party only. It is therefore a perfect partisan witch hunt.

As soon as something has the potential to damage both parties, it gets covered up much quicker, because there is no vested interest to follow through. Get it?

Second, you seem to imply that the media hasn't broken any significant 9/11 stories. They have. There is a massive amount of revelations that the truth movement draws on that come straight from the mainstream media. See historycommons.org. I see to remember an excellent documentary about Ali Mohamed, and they basically laid it all out, albeit with some apologetic bullshit by Jack Cloonan.

Third, do you realize the difference between American and foreign media? They report different things. Go watch Canadian media for a while. Or British media. Or Russian media. See what they say about the States. Conversely, American media will say things Russian media will bury. (I still prefer American media there, Russia is one horrible totalitarian nightmare)

Can you explain away the discrepancy by claiming all foreign media are anti-American? Or that they don't understand America like American media? Or is there a culture of "flaming tires" as Dan Rather put it?

The media DOES censor shit, which is why there are independent media trying to counter that. However, it's not a black and white issue, so stop trying to frame it as such.

 
At 11 February, 2010 18:11, Blogger Billman said...

Excellent and interesting point.

I thought it was okay.

Do you know why? First, it's not even in the same ballpark as 9/11, and it limits the damage to one party only. It is therefore a perfect partisan witch hunt.

How is it not in the same ballpark? It's a president that lied about something and tried to cover it up. Yeah the very thing he's trying to cover up is different and "not in the same ballpark..." but if you can get caught for a blowjob, why is it at all concievable you could get away with blowing up three buidlings and bombing your own military headquarters, and crashing a random plane into the ground in bumfuck Pennsylvania?

As soon as something has the potential to damage both parties, it gets covered up much quicker, because there is no vested interest to follow through. Get it?

I get that.. what I don't get is how 9/11 would be "potentially damaging" to the media. Explain that.

Second, you seem to imply that the media hasn't broken any significant 9/11 stories.

That's not what I'm implying at all. Sorry if you mistook something I wrote for that.

They have. There is a massive amount of revelations that the truth movement draws on that come straight from the mainstream media. See historycommons.org. I see to remember an excellent documentary about Ali Mohamed, and they basically laid it all out, albeit with some apologetic bullshit by Jack Cloonan.

Third, do you realize the difference between American and foreign media?


Yes.

They report different things. Go watch Canadian media for a while. Or British media. Or Russian media. See what they say about the States.

I lived in Japan for 2 years, and visited China, and South Korea and the Phillipines. I'm sort of aware of what foreign media is like.. well, ASIAN foreign media at least.

Conversely, American media will say things Russian media will bury. (I still prefer American media there, Russia is one horrible totalitarian nightmare)

And vice versa, I bet.

Can you explain away the discrepancy by claiming all foreign media are anti-American?

I don't think they are. Japanese media certianlly isn't. Chinese media... yeah, that's probably accurate.

Or that they don't understand America like American media?

Well, again Japanese media actually mocks a lot of American media stories. Just look at how the Japanese reported on the media coverage of the Jay Leno/Conan O'Brien fiasco. Giant monsters destroying the Tonight show set, etc... pretty funny.

The media DOES censor shit,

I agree with you. Holy shit, I agree with you there.

which is why there are independent media trying to counter that.

The Smoking Gun.com I think, is one of them that has some credibility if I'm not mistaken.

However, it's not a black and white issue, so stop trying to frame it as such.

I wasn't. Don't be so defensive or assume so much. It's more of a common sense issue. If they couldn't get away with a relatively minor perosnal problem like the blowjob thing, HOW do you think they could get away with a coverup this massive?

Somebody would've cracked LONG before now.

 
At 11 February, 2010 18:11, Anonymous NoIdentity said...

All you need to do is watch CNN then watch CNN International. The only conclusion one can reach is that CNN thinks Americans are morons.

Russia is one horrible totalitarian nightmare
It's a thousand times better today than it was under Soviet rule.

 
At 11 February, 2010 18:13, Blogger Billman said...

Sorry for typos. I type too fast. Anwyay, my comments are pretty much directed towards Boris, but you're welcome to debate me too, Roid Rage.

 
At 11 February, 2010 18:26, Anonymous New Yorker said...

It's a thousand times better today than it was under Soviet rule.

I don't know about that. I mean, Putin hasn't re-established the gulag as far as I know, but he might as well have crowned himself Tsar, given the repressive dictatorship that has risen there over the past decade.

 
At 11 February, 2010 18:33, Blogger Billman said...

Oh boy, just checked Netflix for something to watch and this week they're promoting Loose Change 9/11: An American Coup ON INSTANT PLAY.

Well, if the Avery Foundation is right, Netflix has to do SOMETHING with those 15,000 copies.

 
At 11 February, 2010 18:47, Blogger Boris Epstein said...

Billman,

Good points and unfortunately I don't have time to respond in enough detail right now. In short, I believe the corporate media here are free to tell whatever damaging truth about any particular person but not about the corporate order running the show.

As for how they covered up the 9/11 - and those opposing the official view of it. Well, as late as December 2006 on a quiet Saturday in Boston not one of them showed up to cover a 9/11 truth event attended by hundreds of people. Even though press releases went to everybody under the sun. And that is just the first thing that comes to mind, something I witnessed personally.

 
At 11 February, 2010 19:18, Anonymous New Yorker said...

Well, as late as December 2006 on a quiet Saturday in Boston not one of them showed up to cover a 9/11 truth event attended by hundreds of people.

Right, because it was a non-event. They don't show up to cover the meetings of the Committee to have Dane Cook appointed to the Supreme Court either, so why should they cover your joke of a group?

It's not a cover-up, Boris. It's that nobody cares. I've tried to explain this to Brian Good after he expressed puzzlement that no scientists responded to his e-mail gibberish.

 
At 11 February, 2010 19:46, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

"It's not a cover-up, Boris. It's that nobody cares. I've tried to explain this to Brian Good after he expressed puzzlement that no scientists responded to his e-mail gibberish."

If nobody cares, then what the fuck are you whining about, bitchhole? Go log out, watch America's Next Top Model and shut the hell up.

 
At 11 February, 2010 20:01, Anonymous New Yorker said...

If nobody cares, then what the fuck are you whining about, bitchhole? Go log out, watch America's Next Top Model and shut the hell up.

I'm not whining about anything. I'm laughing at the "truthers". I come to this blog for the same reason I check out Failblog: to laugh at the idiocy of my fellow homo sapiens.

Also, I don't watch TV. I'd rather read a book or listen to music. Thanks for the suggestion, though.

 
At 11 February, 2010 20:12, Blogger Billman said...

Good points and unfortunately I don't have time to respond in enough detail right now.

I understand, we're all busy... but usually when a truther says this (especially Brian Good) they never return with a response, so I'm not expecting one.

In short, I believe the corporate media here are free to tell whatever damaging truth about any particular person but not about the corporate order running the show.

That's your belief, but it's not fact. And also, there are things like Libel and Slander laws, as well as retractions that kind of prevent media people from telling whatever damaging "truths" you think there are about 9/11 without any real evidence, of which the troof movement has yet to present anything solid and non-speculative.

As for how they covered up the 9/11 - and those opposing the official view of it. Well, as late as December 2006 on a quiet Saturday in Boston not one of them showed up to cover a 9/11 truth event attended by hundreds of people.

Well, maybe they should have done it in NEW YORK, then. That seems more relevant to 9/11 than Boston would, wouldn't you think?

Even though press releases went to everybody under the sun.

Little fact about the media: ALL press releases go to "everybody under the sun." That's kind of rhe point of a press release...

And that is just the first thing that comes to mind, something I witnessed personally.

Ok.

 
At 11 February, 2010 21:15, Blogger Boris Epstein said...

Billman,

While this may not do justice to the topic of the mainstream media's coverup of 9/11 this will have to do for now as I am a bit too tired to put anything coherent together.

http://www.wanttoknow.info/9-11cover-up

 
At 11 February, 2010 22:04, Blogger Billman said...

It's not like there's a time limit...

 
At 12 February, 2010 00:22, Anonymous Roid Raven said...

GOD IT PISSES ME OFF HOW STUPID EVERYONE BUT ME IS. WHY ARE YOU ALL SO STUPID? WHY CANT YOU SEE THE EVIL FASCIST REACTIONARY DICTATORSHIP AS IT IS? OMG LIKE SERIOUSLY, YOU ALL ARE SUCH STUPID SHEEPLE!

 
At 12 February, 2010 01:06, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

Hey 'Bjorn', I like your new style!

 
At 12 February, 2010 01:11, Anonymous NoIdentity said...

Did I get your persona right? I thought I did a great impersonation of your adolescent side.
Who else would call you Roid Raven but your biggest fan?

 
At 12 February, 2010 01:12, Anonymous NoIdentity said...

Who but a scorned fox :-(
I'm not a fox Aesop!

 
At 12 February, 2010 10:18, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

Poor Billman! Loose Change goes into the Netflix rotation and all he can do is whine like the pitiful dog he is.

 
At 12 February, 2010 17:02, Anonymous Marc said...

I love the media cover-up illusion the best.

The attacks happened on live TV, in the media center of the world. All three major networks, all the major cable news networks, and all of those great New York papers were all there with front row seats. Some media orgs actually lost people (Discovery Channel comes to mind).

In spite of this, the troofers would have us beliebe that out of the thousands of reporters who were on the streets at the WTC on 9/11 were all in on it? Seriously?

This would be the story of the century for a reporter to successfully document, and yet in nine years it has not happened. Why? Forget the thousands of people who were actually in the towers that day, what about all of those firefighters and cops who lost brothers? I am supposed to believe that the NYPD would keep silent on the murder of their own? They're a little sentative when one cop gets hit with a milkshake, murdering a huge number is going to get their Irish up, and yet they remain silent? The 10% rule applies to NYPD too, they have to have at least a hand full of cops who may have bought into the troofer insanity, why haven't they uncovered anything?

How do these people breath with their heads so far up their own collective ass?

 
At 12 February, 2010 18:19, Blogger Billman said...

Poor Billman! Loose Change goes into the Netflix rotation and all he can do is whine like the pitiful dog he is.

Aye, tis true. I'm out of things to watch on Netflix and I'm actually considering it... that does make me feel pitiful. Good call, Arhoolie.

 
At 12 February, 2010 19:55, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Watch it on Google video. Netflix pays those whores. It is entirely unethical to contribute money to Avery and his gang.

 
At 12 February, 2010 20:04, Blogger Billman said...

Watch it on Google video. Netflix pays those whores. It is entirely unethical to contribute money to Avery and his gang.

Heh, alright then. I'll make sure when I do break down and watch it, it'll be a pirated version somehow.

 
At 13 February, 2010 08:30, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

Coming along quite nicely on bass there Bilbo!! If you have the rocks you'll be able to see for yourself the Barry Jennings clips.Google will be just fine for that part.Onward Christian Soldier!And,yet more mush from the wimps:"Unethical to contribute money to Avery and his gang (gang?,sheesh)"?. Why,because he's part of an evil conspiracy to bring forward powerful and provocative information to the public? Ah,the Debunker Cult,more insane conspiracy theories than your average mental hospital!

 
At 13 February, 2010 10:52, Blogger Billman said...

And,yet more mush from the wimps:"Unethical to contribute money to Avery and his gang (gang?,sheesh)"?. Why,because he's part of an evil conspiracy to bring forward powerful and provocative information to the public?

Yes. He's a true patriot.

The thing for me about Dylan is he's a complete douchebag who invented the conpsiracy as fiction to make money off of it.

AND he laughs about the deaths of victims:

http://911myths.com/LooseChangeCreatorsSpeak.pdf

Oh wait.. don't believe a pdf file that says Dylan said these things?

HOW ABOUT THE AUDIO!

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7216643725166640147&hl=en#

Debunk that...

You claim you knew people who died in 9/11, as do I. Dylan laughs about thier deaths. Idolize him all you want. He's not getting a penny from me.

 
At 13 February, 2010 12:25, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"the Debunker Cult"

 
At 13 February, 2010 21:49, Anonymous NoIdentity said...

Ah,the Debunker Cult,more insane conspiracy theories than your average mental hospital!
ahaha no sense of irony whatsoever! Contributing money to liars to help them promote lies is unethical. No conspiracy, no crime.
Unless their unbelievably poor money management was malicious and done cooperatively, but I don't think it was as they seem to be accusing each other of losing all their money. You know, the money that presumably was supposed to help spread the gospel of 9-11 truth.
So no, no conspiracy nor theory about one.
When is Loose Change Final Final Cut coming out? Maybe they can recoup their losses, assuming they haven't all started suing each-other for the rights to the Loose Change gravy train.
Now that I'd pay to see.

 
At 14 February, 2010 12:38, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

No one I know idolizes Dylan Avery.He's a very decent,regular,ordinary gentleman.Your caricatures of him are beyond stupid and way off the mark.

 
At 14 February, 2010 12:56, Anonymous Anonymous said...

He's a very decent,regular,ordinary gentleman.Your caricatures of him are beyond stupid and way off the mark.
He's what my people would call a "schmuck".

 
At 14 February, 2010 16:11, Blogger Billman said...

No one I know idolizes Dylan Avery.He's a very decent,regular,ordinary gentleman.Your caricatures of him are beyond stupid and way off the mark.

Heh, even other troofers agree Dylan is a fucking smug douchebag who lies and tries to profit off 9/11. Except, of course to noone's surprise, you wouldn't.

I remember when you came on here to impersonate him, and all you could say was "Ha ha, Dylan makes money," as if that was proof of awesomeness, which also proves you endorse his efforts to make money off 9/11 and laugh about the deaths of victims.

Again, no suprise, Arhoolie. You really are the lowest of the low.

 
At 14 February, 2010 16:13, Blogger Billman said...

Your caricatures of him are beyond stupid and way off the mark.

So is the audio of him doing those things faked or something? Explain how they are "off the mark" and "stupid" when they are things he's actually said and I gave you proof that they came from his mouth (much like you apparently do).

 
At 15 February, 2010 10:37, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

Poor Bilbo-no,I never came here and impersonated Dylan Avery or said the things you say I did.I think you and the miserable lager lout from Violent Crime Central have been worshipping your Brown Friend a little to voraciously."Even other 'truthers'..."?!? My man,stick to illustrating why Anthony Shaffer steps forward to tell the world his story.You've stumbled badly or flat out disappeared on that one so far.Best of luck claiming he's part of the PornBoy's vast left wing conspiracy to frame the CIA and the Pentagon for 9/11!!!

 
At 15 February, 2010 20:55, Blogger Billman said...

Poor Bilbo-no,I never came here and impersonated Dylan Avery or said the things you say I did.

If only the Haloscan archives were working...

I think you and the miserable lager lout from Violent Crime Central have been worshipping your Brown Friend a little to voraciously.

A little to voraciously? Who's our "Brown Friend" and where's Voraciously located on a map?

"Even other 'truthers'..."?!?

That's your comeback? Just ?!? ? ok...

Here's a link to help you to debunk what I said:

http://letsrollforums.com/dylan-avery-jewish-double-t19413.html?s=4276351c692400f442a7bd9ca24f8d05&

My man,stick to illustrating why Anthony Shaffer steps forward to tell the world his story.

Who? When have I ever menioned Anthony Shaffer?

Just pulling random goal changing shit to obscure that you're an idiot who can never answer a direct question, again. Poor Walt the Boyo. Hey, stick to rationalizing why Darth Vader blew up the Death Star in an inside job for the love of a Carebear named Oswald! Why not, makes about as much sense to me as what you just wrote.

You've stumbled badly or flat out disappeared on that one so far.

When have ever I brought your so called Asshat Shaffer up? I don't know who he is, nor do I care.

Best of luck claiming he's part of the PornBoy's vast left wing conspiracy to frame the CIA and the Pentagon for 9/11!!!

I think you've lost your last marble, Walt.

 
At 16 February, 2010 09:06, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

"Anthony Shaffer? Don't know about him,don't care either!!" Poor Debunking Boob Bilbo.He's a one man wrecking crew,if only he knew what the fuck he was talking about.Your Brown Friend resides under your recliner,away from Mom,and renders you hopeless but verbose! Yea,Baggins,"?!?!?" is all you can really say to such a dopey point.Get out of the apartment once in a while and have a Guinness or something,you're as stale as an old cracker.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home