Sunday, February 14, 2010

Voodoo Histories

I picked up a copy of David Aaronovitch's Voodoo Histories, and skipped to the 9/11 section. While much of it is pretty good, I am a bit annoyed by the fact that the author references work by myself and other 9/11 debunkers on the Internet, but never actually credits us. In fact much of one section, including the title "The Structural Engineers with a Special Place in Hell" is taken from this blog.

He concludes the chapter with:

Depite the ambivalence, the website for the Scholars gave evidence of something approaching hyperactivity, as its leading members addressed meetings, wrote articles, did interviews, attended symposia, and organized conferences. But who, exactly, were they? What were they scholars of? A researcher following up on the names discovered that, as of late 2006, out of seventy-six named Scholars for Truth there were no Middle Eastern experts and only two engineers, one of whom thought the United States was plotting to bomb the planet Jupiter with antimatter weapons while the other devoted himself [sic] to studying the mechanics of dentistry. Nine (the largest number) were philosophers, five were English experts, five were psychologists, five were physicists, and four were theologians.

So who exactly is this unnamed researcher? Well from a May 25th, 2006 post of mine titled Who are the Scholars for 9/11 Truth? :



Out of the 76 "experts" the most common academic discipline was philosophy, with 9 members, including a co-founder. Since 7 members did not even list an academic discipline, this was 1/7 of their credentialed membership. English/literature and psychology came in next with 5 members each. Even theology and "humanities" came in with 4 and 3 members respectively. Among actual scientific fields, physics was way in front, with 5 members, including the aforementioned Dr. Jones. I am not sure as to their academic credentials though, at least one of the "physicists", Jeffrey Farrer, isn't even a professor, he is a lab manager at BYU. One has to wonder whether Steven Jones' janitor is also listed as an associate member?

So how many engineers do they have? Out of the 76, a grand total of 2. Jean-Pierre Petit, a French aeronautical engineer, who despite the obvious handicap of being French actually seems to have a relevant qualification. Curiously enough though, he doesn't seem to have written a single word on 9/11. He has written though, on a mysterious plot by the US military to bomb Jupiter with anti-matter weapons!

The second engineer is Judy Wood, who has been mentioned in the comments here for her bizarre billiard ball from the top of the World Trade Center theory. OK, Ms. Wood is an actual Mechanical Engineer at Clemson, but thus far her work has been primarily focused on the stresses of dentistry. A fascinating field no doubt, but hardly relevant to planes crashing into buildings.

So how many structural engineers are listed? Absolutely zero. How many experts in Middle Eastern studies, or the Arabic language? Also zero. But they do have a professor of social work!

Yes, I know in general journalists and researchers (truthers aside) are reluctant to cite blog posts in academic writing, but given that entire sections are based on our work, could you show a little love here?

Labels:

161 Comments:

At 14 February, 2010 17:36, Anonymous paul w said...

Forget about the love-in, you aging hippie, what about the fucking Yanks/military industrial complex/'they' bombing the planet Jupiter with antimatter weapons!

Wait till the media gets hold of this!!!*














* Followed by years of 'the media are too scared to....the elite media...media mouthpieces of the NWO..." etc.

 
At 14 February, 2010 17:46, Anonymous Roid Rage. said...

So...focus on the scholars for 9/11 truth with crackpot Fetzer as a straw man instead of the scholars for 9/11 truth and justice. Bit outdated.

Debunking ancient history. Wow.

 
At 14 February, 2010 17:48, Anonymous Patrick from Cincinnati said...

Roid Rage, fuck off! We're the People's Front of Judea!

 
At 14 February, 2010 17:51, Anonymous NoIdentity said...

So every time one truth group is shown to be insane, do people regroup and form a new one?
What brilliant new insights do these truth and justice folks have to offer?

 
At 14 February, 2010 17:54, Anonymous NoIdentity said...

Do they have any demolition experts on their panel? I'm not just trying to be a smart ass I'm curious if they do and too lazy to look myself.

 
At 14 February, 2010 17:56, Blogger James B. said...

I have no idea when the author wrote the book, but most of that part seems to be from 2006-2007. No matter, garbage based on garbage, is still garbage.

 
At 14 February, 2010 17:56, Anonymous Traffic Cop said...

Jon Gold is a demolition expert.

Ever seen a buffet after he has rolled through...?

 
At 14 February, 2010 18:03, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"He has written though, on a mysterious plot by the US military to bomb Jupiter with anti-matter weapons!"

Boy oh boy do I want to be there when THAT happens!

 
At 14 February, 2010 18:04, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Congratulations on being one of the six that actually bought the rag. Sorry that you didnt get a hat tip, maybe next time.

 
At 14 February, 2010 18:16, Anonymous NoIdentity said...

Anti-matter weapons would be so cool if they weren't completely impossible with today's technology.

 
At 14 February, 2010 18:37, Anonymous NoIdentity said...

You know just one person with experience doing demolition saying "yeah you could wire a 50 story building for demo without anyone noticing" would go a long way for the credibility of the people pushing the controlled demolition theory.
For some reason I doubt such a person exists.

 
At 14 February, 2010 18:44, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

Oh, I don't know, NoIdentity, it seems to me that OF COURSE you could take out walls, break through wallboard, slice through steel beams with cutting torches, leave hundreds of pounds of high explosives lying around, and leave hundreds of miles of wires throughout the building without anybody noticing.

 
At 14 February, 2010 18:48, Anonymous NoIdentity said...

I guess we'll just have to take the word of a bunch of philosophy and English professors. None of whom have any radical political beliefs I'm sure! They just care about Truth. And now Justice too!

 
At 14 February, 2010 19:38, Anonymous New Yorker said...

Congratulations on being one of the six that actually bought the rag. Sorry that you didnt get a hat tip, maybe next time.

Hmm, this from a movement that sees progress in their events being attended by 1/10th the number of people who typically attend a Columbia University basketball game (you know what a powerhouse the Lions are!).

Something about pots, kettles, and black comes to mind....

 
At 14 February, 2010 19:42, Anonymous New Yorker said...

Oh, I don't know, NoIdentity, it seems to me that OF COURSE you could take out walls, break through wallboard, slice through steel beams with cutting torches, leave hundreds of pounds of high explosives lying around, and leave hundreds of miles of wires throughout the building without anybody noticing.

Yup. After all, Philippe Petit only had to hide for hours under a canvas sheet in the still-incomplete and only partially occupied towers in order to complete his tightrope stunt without being caught. I'm sure an entire demolition team tearing apart both towers from top to bottom could have done it without being caught.

I'm actually surprised that there hasn't been any absurd arguments by the "truthers" that "Man on Wire" proves you could've rigged the towers for demolition without being caught.

 
At 14 February, 2010 19:43, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

"You know just one person with experience doing demolition saying "yeah you could wire a 50 story building for demo without anyone noticing" would go a long way for the credibility of the people pushing the controlled demolition theory. For some reason I doubt such a person exists."

There's the commercial controlled demolition straw man, rearing its ugly head again.

 
At 14 February, 2010 19:45, Anonymous NoIdentity said...

It's not a straw man. It's a massive gap in the CD narrative.

 
At 14 February, 2010 19:51, Anonymous NoIdentity said...

"Means, Motive, and Opportunity"
It's that last one I'm talking about. I'm just making a friendly suggestion to the truth and justice crowd!

 
At 14 February, 2010 19:52, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

"It's not a straw man. It's a massive gap in the CD narrative."

So let me see. It's not a straw man eh? So...the "conspirators" actually hired a controlled demolition company and asked them to rig the World Trade Center like they would normally do? I.e. try to protect adjacent structures from harm, etc. etc.?

Really? No. Your argument was a straw man. If it was a demolition, it was a military/covert operation, not a commercial assignment. How silly can you be? At least attack the right truther arguments, not just the ones you yourself invent to take down easily.

 
At 14 February, 2010 20:00, Anonymous NoIdentity said...

The only straw man here is you're commercial demolition company.
Commercial or military, a controlled demolition would involve the same process of placing very large quantities of explosives in the right places.
Anyone with expereince in demolition, military or civilian, would be able to confirm or deny the ease of this process.

 
At 14 February, 2010 20:00, Blogger James B. said...

Well the troofers just argue that the conspirators used remote controlled detonators attached to fewer, but far more explosive, supermagiconanothermite charges hidden in the ceiling or somewhere similar.

Of course then you have another problem, because these massive explosives would have knocked out every window for 10 blocks in every direction.

 
At 14 February, 2010 20:03, Anonymous NoIdentity said...

What the hell is a covert controlled demolition? More wild speculation?
Don't you see how incredibly elaborate such a covert operation would have to be?

 
At 14 February, 2010 20:06, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

Of course then you have another problem, because these massive explosives would have knocked out every window for 10 blocks in every direction.

This is utter unsubstantiated nonsense peddled by photographers like Brent Blanchard and hacks like Ron Craig.

A shaped charge directs its energy only at the column it is tied to. This is not some munitions factory exploding. Pure fantasy.

 
At 14 February, 2010 20:07, Anonymous NoIdentity said...

Of course, just because a plan is elaborate doesn't make it impossible. But the more people involved in keeping a secret, the less likely it will stay one.

 
At 14 February, 2010 20:08, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

Furthermore, nano-thermite, however it would be used, say not as an igniter but as actual explosive or incendiary bomb or so... is tunable. This is called "impulse management". Gas expansion rates, reaction rates, temperatures, everything can be regulated.

 
At 14 February, 2010 20:09, Anonymous NoIdentity said...

Sounds like an incredibly complicated process to achieve the destruction of a building of secondary importance!

 
At 14 February, 2010 20:15, Blogger James B. said...

A shaped charge directs its energy only at the column it is tied to. This is not some munitions factory exploding. Pure fantasy.

But the supermagiconanothermite hypothesis does not involve the use of shaped charges, and even if it did, that does not make them silent. The use of shaped charges would get you back to the original problem of having to strip down and weaken the beams, plus leave very distinct signatures that every police officer, firefighter and demolitions worker at the scene would have noticed.

It is so convenient to have an always morphing argument. If anyone makes a counterclaim you just shift to another argument. Thus you can never be proven wrong, no matter how idiotic.

 
At 14 February, 2010 20:16, Anonymous NoIdentity said...

I try to look at things in terms of probability. What is the probability that a building suffered unprecedented structural failure from fire and debris damage vs the probability that a cabal managed to plant explosives in that same building without anyone noticing or blabbing, an unprecedented crime of epic proportions.
One way or another, there's a first time for everything eh?

 
At 14 February, 2010 20:23, Anonymous NoIdentity said...

http://blowupjupiter.blogspot.com/2007/10/why-jupiter.html
hahaha gotta love physicists sense of humor.

 
At 14 February, 2010 21:58, Anonymous New Yorker said...

Good to see that Roid Rage has gone full metal truther on us, and is now babbling about thermite and controlled demolition in the same unhinged manner.

 
At 14 February, 2010 22:59, Anonymous TVY said...

A shaped charge directs its energy only at the column it is tied to.

Aside from the rest of your argument being inane, this too is patently false. At a minimum, it's energy is directed at the column and half of it in the opposite way. That's the theoretically perfect shaped charge.

Considering how much you twoofies like to bring up "conservation of momentum", you'd hope your own fantasies wouldn't violate the law.

 
At 15 February, 2010 00:26, Anonymous paul w said...

A shaped charge directs its energy only at the column it is tied to.
RR


Is there nothing that truthers are not expert in?

Physics. Engineering. Flying jet aircraft. Shaped charges.

Ah, the internet. You too can be a genius.

 
At 15 February, 2010 01:46, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

"But the supermagiconanothermite hypothesis does not involve the use of shaped charges, and even if it did, that does not make them silent. The use of shaped charges would get you back to the original problem of having to strip down and weaken the beams,"
No need to mock, btw, even Pat admits nano-thermite exists. It's not very surprising. You don't?"

Anyways: nope. See Amptiac (2002). Nano-thermite and shaped charges go together no problem. No need to strip down and weaken beams. This is for commercial demolitions where one is trying to achieve the same result but economically and efficiently. There are no liability problems, no need to have the demolition proceed in an orderly fashion. That is, if WTC 1 & 2 were demolitions at all.

"plus leave very distinct signatures that every police officer, firefighter and demolitions worker at the scene would have noticed."
Not without taggant.

"It is so convenient to have an always morphing argument. If anyone makes a counterclaim you just shift to another argument. Thus you can never be proven wrong, no matter how idiotic."
That cuts both ways. It's very convenient to artificially simplify the argument, use straw men, or make demands that don't need to be met at all. (Good example: taggant) Plus, it's very convenient for "debunkers" to move the area towards speculation, iow how the towers were demolished, instead of discussing why nano-explosives were present in WTC dust in the first place.

I do not believe Jones and Ryan manufactured these chips themselves, then went to the trouble of inserting them in the samples of their sources, for example when sent to Basile, Couannier or Harrit, and contaminate them with trace residues of other elements in other to have their experiments look more lifelike.

Still, those extremely high temperatures reported by other sources need to be accounted for.

I don't need there to be bombs in the WTC, I don't need any of the WTC buildings to be blown up. I'm simply addressing issues which you people think you are above, because of your l337 "skeptic" skills.

Besides, most of you are pro-torture, (I don't give a shit which euphemism you use).... enough said. You're bat shit crazy kookloon ultra-nationalists which will simply defend the government, no matter if it's right or wrong, criminal, murderous or even terrorist.

 
At 15 February, 2010 01:49, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

I try to look at things in terms of probability. What is the probability that a building suffered unprecedented structural failure from fire and debris damage vs the probability that a cabal managed to plant explosives in that same building without anyone noticing or blabbing, an unprecedented crime of epic proportions.

I fully agree with that, NoIdentity. I only consider slightly more probable than you do. I see plenty of problems with the demolition hypothesis for especially WTC 1 & 2. For example: where are the columns showing signs of being blown up? There are none, and what exceptions there are, might as well been hit by AA 11 or UA 175.

 
At 15 February, 2010 01:50, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

"Good to see that Roid Rage has gone full metal truther on us, and is now babbling about thermite and controlled demolition in the same unhinged manner."

Good to see you don't have any counterarguments as usual.

 
At 15 February, 2010 01:54, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

"Aside from the rest of your argument being inane, this too is patently false. At a minimum, it's energy is directed at the column and half of it in the opposite way. That's the theoretically perfect shaped charge."

Okay...source? I'm not contesting this if it's correct. From memory, I see a cone shaped metal encasing that is violently protruded inside out causing a focused blast to emanate from the focal point of said cone, but in the opposite direction of its original position, i.e. a cone pointed to the left is blasted inside out and the blast energy is directed to the right, where the column (or target to be penetrated) is.

 
At 15 February, 2010 01:56, Anonymous paul w said...

Nano-thermite and shaped charges go together no problem. No need to strip down and weaken beams. This is for commercial demolitions where one is trying to achieve the same result but economically and efficiently. There are no liability problems, no need to have the demolition proceed in an orderly fashion
RR


Wow. They're also an expert on using Nano-thermite, AND an expert on commercial demolitions, in not just setting them up but ALSO the financial and legal requirements.

Wow! I mean, OMG!!!!!

RR, you are my hero!

 
At 15 February, 2010 01:58, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

"Ah, the internet. You too can be a genius."

Yes! Just bring me sourced counterarguments and we all learn. Don't whine so much. I retract my earlier remarks that SLC frequenters are stoopid. I guess it's not that bad.

Only urukhai such as "Lazarus Long", "Traffic Cop" and Sexton are as dense as a dinky toy, I guess.

 
At 15 February, 2010 01:58, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"you are pro-torture, (I don't give a shit which euphemism you use).... enough said. You're bat shit crazy kookloon ultra-nationalists which will simply defend the government, no matter if it's right or wrong, criminal, murderous or even terrorist."


I'm not.

Wrong again.

 
At 15 February, 2010 01:59, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

"RR, you are my hero!"

<3

 
At 15 February, 2010 02:00, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

Anonymous says:

"I'm not.

Wrong again."


Anonymous condemns torture. What good is that?

 
At 15 February, 2010 02:06, Anonymous paul w said...

That was me.

You called me a torturer.

Plus, bat shit crazy kookloon ultra-nationalists which will simply defend the government, no matter if it's right or wrong, criminal, murderous or even terrorist.

I'm not.

So, you are wrong.

 
At 15 February, 2010 02:16, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

"So, you are wrong."

The more of you prove me wrong, the better I feel in this case. But I doubt many would follow your example. Certainly not Pat and JamesB, or they would start a semantic discussion about the fruits and merits of so-called "Enhanced Interrogation Techniques".

It's obfuscatory apologist drivel with euphemisms.

 
At 15 February, 2010 02:30, Anonymous paul w said...

What example?

Translate, please.

 
At 15 February, 2010 02:57, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

"Translate, please."

Jesus Christ. Try reading for comprehension. Get ready? My .. Pet .. Goat..

 
At 15 February, 2010 02:58, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

You're a Brit, aren't you.

Seriously, is there some sort of liquor induced permanent mental impairment involved here?

 
At 15 February, 2010 05:12, Blogger angrysoba said...

Actually, I think that's quite a serious oversight on Aaronovitch's part. Quite a large chunk of your work is being used there without mentioning you by name. You should certainly write to him.

 
At 15 February, 2010 05:34, Anonymous sackcloth and ashes said...

Drop him a line in the thread of one of his comments. See if he responds.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/david_aaronovitch/article7019817.ece

 
At 15 February, 2010 06:09, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

"Actually, I think that's quite a serious oversight on Aaronovitch's part."

His entire book is apparently not only flawed and deceitful, it is also plagiarized from other flawed and deceitful material, ha ha! The guy is a hack and a fraud. At least David Ray Griffin's errors are his own! Why don't I find this surprising after being so unimpressed with his Salon interview. Another big fail for the professional liars.

 
At 15 February, 2010 06:54, Anonymous New Yorker said...

Good to see you don't have any counterarguments as usual.

The counter-arguments (as if there ever was an "argument" in the first place) have been beaten to death on this blog for almost 4 years. If you're too stupid to find them, I don't care. It ain't my life's mission to educate an adolescent with severe emotional issues and mediocre intelligence on the way the world works.

I noticed you spent almost all of a Sunday afternoon here furious spouting your nonsense. Can't you find something better to do with your life rather than pissing it away on conspiracy nonsense?

 
At 15 February, 2010 07:12, Anonymous sackcloth and ashes said...

'At least David Ray Griffin's errors are his own! Why don't I find this surprising after being so unimpressed with his Salon interview. Another big fail for the professional liars.'

Is it his fucked-up typing style, or has Roid Rage just admitted that '9/11 Truth' is a crock of shit?

 
At 15 February, 2010 07:27, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Really? No. Your argument was a straw man. If it was a demolition, it was a military/covert operation,..."

Which means they would still have to do EXACTLY THE SAME THING THAT COMMERCIAL DEMO COMPANY would have to do.

You really are an elbow licking retard, aren't you?

 
At 15 February, 2010 07:29, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"This is utter unsubstantiated nonsense peddled by photographers like Brent Blanchard and hacks like Ron Craig."

Yet you have super ninja military engineers slithering through both WTC towers placing explosives.

You really are a fucking retard, aren't you?

 
At 15 February, 2010 07:36, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Anyways: nope. See Amptiac (2002). Nano-thermite and shaped charges go together no problem. No need to strip down and weaken beams."

Which means they wouldn't work.


""plus leave very distinct signatures that every police officer, firefighter and demolitions worker at the scene would have noticed."
Not without taggant."

He's talking about the explosions.

"instead of discussing why nano-explosives were present in WTC dust in the first place."

They weren't.


You really are......

Oh, never mind.

 
At 15 February, 2010 07:48, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

The counter-arguments (as if there ever was an "argument" in the first place) have been beaten to death on this blog for almost 4 years. If you're too stupid to find them, I don't care. It ain't my life's mission to educate an adolescent with severe emotional issues and mediocre intelligence on the way the world works.

And yet, here you are, arrogant blowhard that you are, relying entirely on ad hominem. If you could divorce yourself from your superiority complex long enough to provide me with that "enlightenment" so sorely missing from the historical record on 9/11, then I would have something to respond to. Yet you don't. Your arrogance is supposed to convince me.

Are you a historian? Just a hobbyist? You don't visit this blog for accurate information, I don't believe that. This blog is a McCarthyist hatefest free-for-all and you come here to get your fix. That I've been spoiling that this past week is the thorn in your side, evidenced by the frustration dripping from every word in your comment. Deal with it, it's all you inglorious 9/11 family stalkers, pathological liars and blind overzealous nationalist warmongers deserve, as far as I'm concerned.

I noticed you spent almost all of a Sunday afternoon here furious spouting your nonsense. Can't you find something better to do with your life rather than pissing it away on conspiracy nonsense?
Ask the 9/11 family members signed on to NYCCAN. They reject people like you and your complacent, gullible schoolboy-like obedience to authority on 9/11, and I congratulate them for it. For too long, folks like Pat and JamesB thought they could intimidate those who got fucked over into silence. Pat can muster some respect for John Feal, but only barely, because his story "checks out" in the mainstream media. Excuse while I throw up.

Sometimes they do some legitimate debunking, but as with most emotional issues, proponents and opponents dig in, the war commences and the first casualty is truth. Because of despicable people like you and the authors of this blog you revere, constructive research into 9/11 is impossible, and legitimate issues remain undiscussed. Because of bullshit artists, demagogues, hacks, and delusional incompetents in the truth movement, good research is drowned out.

Pat and JamesB are just upset (closet?) conservatives who will whitewash virtually any wrongdoing, especially on the right end of the political spectrum, and bury whistleblowers, activists and other justice and truth seekers under a septic tank of
vitriol, making virtually no distinction. They will invent apologetic excuses for torture, illegal war, militarism and the entire awful totalitarian climate. They will enthusiastically tow the party line perfectly in lockstep with the miserable mouthpieces in the mainstream media, who cite and refer to them in mutual admiration.

I despise people like that. Now if you really have superior intelligence, you'd prove it by demonstrating your historical insights beyond self-congratulatory name dropping and fact fetish by showing some perspective on contemporary history of American empire, revealing at least the tiniest sliver of intellectual integrity while doing so.

Unless, of course, you continue your career as ruthless revisionist con artist slash online amateur psychoanalyst. Talk about wasting time on bullshit.

 
At 15 February, 2010 08:02, Anonymous S. Jensen said...

"For too long, folks like Pat and JamesB thought they could intimidate those who got fucked over into silence."

You're actually serious - aren't you?

This coming from someone who compares posters on here to Hitler and the Nazis.

Truly amazing...

 
At 15 February, 2010 08:16, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

"This coming from someone who compares posters on here to Hitler and the Nazis.

Truly amazing..."


Fuck you, Nazi Hitlerite. Be silent.

 
At 15 February, 2010 08:30, Blogger James B. said...

Huh? Who exactly am I intimidating? With a blog? I wish I were that powerful.

 
At 15 February, 2010 08:42, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Pat and JamesB are just upset (closet?) conservatives who will whitewash virtually any wrongdoing, especially on the right end of the political spectrum, and bury whistleblowers, activists and other justice and truth seekers under a septic tank of vitriol, making virtually no distinction. They will invent apologetic excuses for torture, illegal war, militarism and the entire awful totalitarian climate. They will enthusiastically tow the party line perfectly in lockstep with the miserable mouthpieces in the mainstream media, who cite and refer to them in mutual admiration."

So the mask comes off and raging diaper is revealed as.....the same old reactionary conformo-radical, spouting the same tired old bromides, an America-hating parasite.

Ho-hum.

 
At 15 February, 2010 08:42, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

Adn raging diaper?

Naom Chomsky called.

He wants his talking points back.

 
At 15 February, 2010 08:43, Anonymous New Yorker said...

It's amazing the amount of time and effort Roid Rage apparently puts into the mindless babble he spews here. It really is sad. Please go do something more meaningful with your life rather than piss it away on conspiracy theories, Roid Rage.

If you could divorce yourself from your superiority complex long enough to provide me with that "enlightenment" so sorely missing from the historical record on 9/11, then I would have something to respond to. Yet you don't. Your arrogance is supposed to convince me.

I don't care to. Go find it for yourself.

Are you a historian? Just a hobbyist?

I'm here to laugh at people like you.

This blog is a McCarthyist hatefest free-for-all and you come here to get your fix.

False.

That I've been spoiling that this past week is the thorn in your side, evidenced by the frustration dripping from every word in your comment.

And just like Brian Good and Boris Epstein, we get the megalomaniacal claim that we're "frustrated" or "scared" or "desperate" because of their posts. No. It's pretty much "out of sight, out of mind" once I close this webpage. I'm just here to poke the lunatics like 19th century Londoners did at Bedlam.

Ask the 9/11 family members signed on to NYCCAN. They reject people like you and your complacent, gullible schoolboy-like obedience to authority on 9/11, and I congratulate them for it.

Nobody cares about them. If the loss of a loved one has caused them such psychological trauma that they join conspiracy cults, then they should seek professional psychiatric help.

Because of bullshit artists, demagogues, hacks, and delusional incompetents in the truth movement, good research is drowned out.

I agree. Now, doesn't the fact that the "truth" movement is overwhelmingly frauds, cranks, and lunatics tell you something?

Pat and JamesB are just upset (closet?) conservatives who will whitewash virtually any wrongdoing, especially on the right end of the political spectrum, and bury whistleblowers, activists and other justice and truth seekers under a septic tank of vitriol, making virtually no distinction.

What? First, Pat and James are pretty open about being conservatives. Second, they never touch on anything politics-related unless it's directly related to 9/11 "truth". Perhaps you haven't noticed, but many, if not most of the commenters here are liberals. Lazarus Long does not a blog make.

They will invent apologetic excuses for torture, illegal war, militarism and the entire awful totalitarian climate. They will enthusiastically tow the party line perfectly in lockstep with the miserable mouthpieces in the mainstream media, who cite and refer to them in mutual admiration.

Yawn.

Now if you really have superior intelligence, you'd prove it by demonstrating your historical insights beyond self-congratulatory name dropping and fact fetish by showing some perspective on contemporary history of American empire, revealing at least the tiniest sliver of intellectual integrity while doing so.

I already do.

Unless, of course, you continue your career as ruthless revisionist con artist slash online amateur psychoanalyst. Talk about wasting time on bullshit.

I can't wait for your next response, that is, unless your father revokes your computer privileges because you failed to hold up your end of the deal where you can spend as much time fighting the global capitalist-imperialist world order as long as you get a "B" in algebra.

 
At 15 February, 2010 09:19, Anonymous Newb said...

Let me see if I have this WTC 7 thing right:

- The big bad gov't somehow prepped an occupied 47-story office building for demolition without anyone noticing.

- The gov't had something significant to gain by blowing up an evacuated, barely-known skyscraper.

- Whatever the purpose was, the easiest and stealthiest way to accomplish it was to execute a "classic controlled demolition" before the eyes of the entire world.

- And the explosive sounds immediately preceding the collapse were not captured on any recordings.

Really, did I get that right?

 
At 15 February, 2010 09:19, Blogger Dave Kyte said...

"provide me with that "enlightenment" so sorely missing from the historical record on 9/11"

Arguing fromm personal ignorance, a common tactic with the conspiracy theorist types. There try and elevate their inability to understand a subject to the level of proof. "Tell me?.... Why?..... You will note this is a tactic used by children all the time. Try and wear the parent down with constant question on why they can't do what they want. This fools no one but fools.

You see it too with other conspiracy theorist bunk, Fake Moon landing loons use nothing but question, "Why is the shadow that way? "Why does the flag seem to flutter in a vacuum?" And the thing is all of them are stupid question that if had even a modicum of critical thinking ability would become clear. Thinking is a dangerous thing for the conspiracy theorist loon, ruins a perfectly good fantasy.

 
At 15 February, 2010 09:41, Anonymous Ritchie Rosson said...

I loved Voodoo Histories. I don't think i'd be a follower of your blog without reading it so I guess that's a plus. Well done on your brilliant blogging! Big respect.

 
At 15 February, 2010 10:47, Blogger Triterope said...

Now if you really have superior intelligence, you'd prove it by demonstrating your historical insights by showing some perspective on contemporary history of American empire.

People have tried, junior. Your response every time has been either to change the subject to some other 9/11 conspiracy meme from your extensive memorized list, or to make some comment that reveals your failure to understand the subject matter.

You are ineducable. "Demonstrating historical insights" to you is a waste of time.

 
At 15 February, 2010 11:40, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Not that anyone really cares, but there are only two online instances of the phrase "snowballing ... choda": One is a comment on this blog by "Roid Rage", and the other is a 9/11-related comment on counterknowledge.com by a "hANOVER fIST" who runs the blog http://911liarsexposed.blogspot.com/

Same person?

 
At 15 February, 2010 13:06, Anonymous New Yorker said...

Same person?

Unlikely. Roid Rage is obviously into extreme left politics, while this hanover fist guy seems like a far-right black helicopters type. He's got a prominent link to Christopher Bollyn and his blog seems less about 9/11 "truth" conspiracy rants and more about global warming denialist rants.

Granted, the extreme left and extreme right often turn into the same thing (Stalin and Hitler) but Roid Rage's style doesn't match that of hanover fist.

 
At 15 February, 2010 13:13, Anonymous NoIdentity said...

We're pretty pathetic for a global empire. We're all sentimental and preoccupied with causalities, both our own and those of the poor bastards we're occupying. Sometimes I think the people in charge of our foreign policy actually believe this nonsense about spreading democracy.
The British, now THEY were an empire! They weren't afraid to slaughter rebellious natives en masse. And the Soviets! They certainly didn't fuss over dead soldiers. "Your son died for the glory of Mother Russia." End of story. Cindy Sheehanovich would have been disappeared into a gulag and no media outlet would have ever mentioned her name let alone spending the entire summer fussing over her until a hurricane came along and wiped out a city.
Hegemony and Empire are not the same thing. False comparisons between the British or Soviet Empires and American dominance since 1945 demonstrate a limited understanding of history.
Sure we've done plenty of nasty things, but we're amateurs compared to the professionals.

 
At 15 February, 2010 13:20, Anonymous NoIdentity said...

If you're really smart you can attract both extreme-left and extreme-right, atheists and fundamentalists, pacifists and gun-nuts, white-nationalists and multiculturalists all under one giant tent. All that is required is a shared paranoid and gullibility.
Seriously. Alex Jones is a marketing genius.
He's the only one I've seen who gets all of the aforementioned groups to hold hands an unite against the ... whoever it is this week that's responsible for all of the world's ills.
Fortunately the sum of all of the aforementioned groups are still irrelevant, even if they all hold hands.
For the time being.

 
At 15 February, 2010 14:22, Anonymous paul w said...

"Jesus Christ. Try reading for comprehension. Get ready? My .. Pet .. Goat.."

"Seriously, is there some sort of liquor induced permanent mental impairment involved here?"

......................

I wish. I'm trawling through (at times) an unbelievably boring assessment.

It's nice to take the odd break and watch your hysterical performance.

Still have no idea what the fuck you're on about, though.

 
At 15 February, 2010 14:24, Anonymous Anti-Imperial said...

Democracy and Empire are not mutually exclusive. See The British and French Empires in the 19th century or The Roman Republic in the hundred years prior to Caesar.
What do you call a country that has 700+ military bases across the world on every continent, a country that spends nearly a trillion dollars on its military every year, more than every other country's military budgets combined?
It is in democratic empires that covert politics are most necessary as to maintain public opinion in favor of the military state. The Soviets didn't care nor did they need to care about public opinion so they were out in the open about their crimes.

 
At 15 February, 2010 14:28, Anonymous ConsDemo said...

All that is required is a shared paranoid and gullibility.

Also a desire for simple answers. All the concerns about the threat of terrorism can simply be dismissed if one concludes the US attacked itself on 9/11. Similarly, climate change is incredibly complex and requires very complex solutions, one can simply opt out by denying it exists. For better or worse, politics is about offering people simple (and often false) choices. The mainstream politicos do it and conspiratoids take it to the extremes. Everything unpleasant can simply be blamed on the evil NWO elite, bring them to justice and we can all live happily ever after.

 
At 15 February, 2010 14:39, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

A military budget that

1.) is nowhere near a trillion dollars, and

2.) represents a very low 4% of GDP

is a called a disgrace.

"The Soviets didn't care nor did they need to care about public opinion so they were out in the open about their crimes."

Never heard of "Pravda" there, bunky?

"I hate Communism most for its cold-blooded murder of the truth! Pravda doesn't mean truth. Pravda means whatever serves the world Communist revolution."

-Robert A. Heinlein

So, yeah, the Soviets lied through their stinking teeth with every breath they took.

 
At 15 February, 2010 14:53, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"...climate change is incredibly complex and requires very complex solutions, one can simply opt out by denying it exists."


News flash: AGW is dead as a dodo.

Global warming high priest Phil Jones let's the cat out of the bag:

Nice roundup here:

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2010/02/025591.php

 
At 15 February, 2010 14:59, Anonymous ConsDemo said...

What do you call a country that has 700+ military bases across the world on every continent, a country that spends nearly a trillion dollars on its military every year, more than every other country's military budgets combined?

That may be true but do you have a credible source for this claim? I don’t doubt the US military budget is the largest but two caveats come to mind. There are a number of items built into the defense budget that are more social welfare (military health care, etc) than bombs and bullets. Second, authoritarian states don’t feel the need for budgetary transparency. Do we really know how much Cuba or Iran spends on their military? I don’t doubt the US budget is the largest but I question the “more than all others combined” statement. Even if the 700+ figure is valid, it includes things are basically outposts with perhaps no more than a small airfield or monitoring devices. In any case, let me get to your central point, which is the justification for a large military. One can certainly argue with the virtue of this or that weapons system, but the threat is hardly imaginary.

It is in democratic empires that covert politics are most necessary as to maintain public opinion in favor of the military state.

Well, I don't know how you can have an empire that doesn't have colonies. In any case, this line of thought relies on seeing conspiracies to explain everything and assumes this goes on all the time. I’m hard-pressed to see evidence it is true and frankly, if you are really concerned about the size and breadth of the US military, you are focusing on the wrong thing. The real reasons aren’t hidden at all but in plain sight. I wish we weren’t so loyal to Israel and less dependent on fossil fuels but we are in both cases, hence we have a presence in the Middle East. The US is seen by Muslims as the reason for all that ails the region. Islamic grievances against the US are no secret and Islamic militants see mass murder as a legitimate tactic to use against their enemies. It seems we have two choices, getting out of the Middle East or accepting the fact that we have to defend ourselves against jihadis. I’d prefer the former, but failing that, I don’ think we can just stick our heads in the sand and disarm.

 
At 15 February, 2010 15:02, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

The AGW story from the horses mouth:

http://tinyurl.com/yb2loyt

"Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995"

From the story:

"Professor Jones also conceded the possibility that the world was warmer in medieval times than now – suggesting global warming may not be a man-made phenomenon.
And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no ‘statistically significant’ warming."

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

Lazarus Long, no, the evidence of climate change is still quite compelling. That its advocates have been overzealous doesn't change the larger picture. You may be right that the public is simply unwilling to make the sacrifices necessary to combat climate change and the opponents now have more excuses to try to confuse them, but the problem remains.

 
At 15 February, 2010 15:52, Anonymous Anti-Imperial said...

Do we really know how much Cuba or Iran spends on their military?
You mean that dirt poor Stalinist island resort off the southern coast of Florida and the oil exporter that has to import gasoline? I think we can safely say that their defense budgets probably can't compete with the budget of the Texas national guard.
As far as military spending goes, I'll point only to sources that can't immediately be dismissed as some lefty think tanks, like SIPIRI.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/spending.htm
http://www.globalfirepower.com/defense-spending-budget.asp
The CIA World Factbook used to be a great source for this kind of data but lately they only publish defense spending as a percent of GDP, which is relevant but the absolute numbers are more important. That Oman spends 11% of its GDP on its military really doesn't mean anything.
More recently China and Russia have increased their defense spending so it's possible that the rest of the world combined might actually have surpassed the United States. It's also worth noting that NATO members combined dense spending is well over 80% of the global total.

In any case, let me get to your central point, which is the justification for a large military.
Yes let's! It was called the Soviet Union and it has been gone for almost a generation yet our global posture has, instead of remaining unchanged or pulling back, pushed closer to Russian borders.
As far as oil goes, its a commodity traded on global markets. The purpose of maintaining a military presence in the middle-east is to retain the ability to cut off the oil supply to our enemies, not to maintain that flow to ourselves, which could be done with money alone.

 
At 15 February, 2010 16:01, Anonymous ewing2001 said...

Brussels Train Crash: Operator Infrabel linked to Alstom-Bombardier-Thales Defense Alliance and European Satellite Management System
by ewing2001
http://ff.im/fXI96

 
At 15 February, 2010 16:11, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"ConsDemo said...
Lazarus Long, no, the evidence of climate change is still quite compelling."

Sorry, it never was, except in the minds of true believers and leftist thugs.

It is dead dead dead.

"That its advocates have been overzealous doesn't change the larger picture."

If by "overzealous" you mean lying through their teeth, I'll conceed the point.


"You may be right that the public is simply unwilling to make the sacrifices necessary to combat climate change"

I know, boys and girls, let's destroy Western civilization in the name of Gaia!


"and the opponents now have more excuses to try to confuse them,"

Yep, confuse them with facts, instead of cooked data and Stalinist tactics to silence opposing points of view.


"but the problem remains."

What problem?

No AGW, no problem.

 
At 15 February, 2010 16:15, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

Here's a perfect example:

http://tinyurl.com/y9bqpm7

The Rome weather station, the one they take official temperatures from, AND EXTROPOLATE OUT ACROSS ITALY AS NEEDED, sits in the path of jet exhaust.

Kinda biases the readings to the high side, doncha think?

 
At 15 February, 2010 16:36, Anonymous New Yorker said...

This is why the Lazarus Long-Roid Rage clash of the titans in the other thread was so entertaining. One is a bone-headed Chomsky disciple prone to conspiratorial thought on 9/11 (among other things, I'm sure), the other is a bone-headed Limbaugh disciple prone to conspiratorial thought on global warming (among other things, I'm sure).

Watching them duke it out was funny, as long as you try to forget that a large chunk of the population of this country is as utterly incapable of rational thought as they are. Otherwise it's positively terrifying.

As for what anti-imperial says, I can't quibble too much with it. We've got an absurdly bloated welfare program called the military, which, along with medicare, medicaid, and social security, is going to send this country over the fiscal ledge unless we make some big spending cuts and/or tax increases. Given the dysfunctional state of Washington these days, however, I expect nothing less than an eventual bond market revolt and the crisis in Greece writ large over here.

 
At 15 February, 2010 17:15, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"...the other is a bone-headed Limbaugh disciple prone to conspiratorial thought on global warming"

So I guess you missed all the CRU e-mails, New Yorker?


"We've got an absurdly bloated welfare program called the military"

My son spent 8 months at sea on board the USS Kearsage, and 7 months in Afghanistan in a FOB to protect your right to be a horses ass.

So take your "military as welfare" comment, fold it until it's all corners, and shove it up your ass.

 
At 15 February, 2010 17:20, Anonymous ConsDemo said...

As far as military spending goes, I'll point only to sources that can't immediately be dismissed as some lefty think tanks, like SIPIRI.

Okay, well as you note, it is a bit dated, but I’ll concede the U.S. is the biggest spender which is the real point you are making.

Yes let's! It was called the Soviet Union and it has been gone for almost a generation yet our global posture has, instead of remaining unchanged or pulling back, pushed closer to Russian borders.

Well, given Ukraine will soon switch in orientation and the Missile Defense System has been scrapped, I think you could argue the push is over. In any case, we’ve still got an array of collective security arrangements around the world. I think any defender of the status quo would argue Russia isn’t the biggest threat. The amount of money devoted to dealing with the threat of Islamic terrorism isn’t small, I’d suspect it drives the majority of spending, then there is concern about China, Russia might come in third. You can argue the latter two aren’t the threats people make them out to be (I suspect you’d get a lot of push back, although not from me), there isn’t any conspiracy involved here.

< The purpose of maintaining a military presence in the middle-east is to retain the ability to cut off the oil supply to our enemies, not to maintain that flow to ourselves, which could be done with money alone.>

Hmmm. Not quite sure what bolsters this claim. If that’s the purpose of the American military presence in the Middle East, how come it has never been used to cut off the supply to any of our enemies? Secondly, you wouldn’t need the elaborate array of forces that is there to disrupt the flow. One aircraft carrier could destroy a lot of Middle Eastern oil production pretty quickly. On the other, trying to protect those facilities and the shipping lanes requires the level of force that is presently there. Again, you could argue this is unnecessary, and I wouldn’t disagree (I don't see inexpensive fossil fuels as a virtue) but lot of other people would.

 
At 15 February, 2010 17:36, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

An apology to New Yorker for my intemperate outburst.

Sorry.

 
At 15 February, 2010 17:40, Anonymous NoIdentity said...

What do you call a country that has 700+ military bases across the world ... more than every other country's military budgets combined?

A superpower on the edge of bankruptcy!

our global posture has, instead of remaining unchanged or pulling back, pushed closer to Russian borders.

To be fair, the Eastern Europeans wanted to join NATO because they are scared of Russia. Trying to get Georgia and Ukraine in was silly.
As far as blocking oil supplies to our enemies goes, I agree that this may be one of the benefits of military dominance of the Middle East, but it isn't the sole determinant. Plus I'm guessing that you think our ability to cut off oil to China (or whoever else) is a bad thing, whereas I see it as a good thing.

NYer,
I don't think its fair (and I doubt you intended to imply equality between them) compare 9-11 truthers to AGW deniers. While I accept the high probability that CO2 causes warming of the earth, especially at the poles, the "solutions" to this problem seem worse than the problem itself. The way AGW proponents distort and exaggerate their claims does not help their case, I'm thinking specifically of Al Gore and his silly claims about imminent glacier free Himalayas.

 
At 15 February, 2010 17:42, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

Now, back to my point:

A small, a very small sample of the kind of crap the warmist "scientists" were trying to pull off:



In the circumstances, here are some summaries of the CRUgate files. I’ll update these as and when I can. The refs are the email number.

Phil Jones writes to University of Hull to try to stop sceptic Sonia Boehmer Christiansen using her Hull affiliation. Graham F Haughton of Hull University says its easier to push greenery there now SB-C has retired.(1256765544)

Michael Mann discusses how to destroy a journal that has published sceptic papers.(1047388489)

Tim Osborn discusses how data are truncated to stop an apparent cooling trend showing up in the results (0939154709). Analysis of impact here. Wow!

Phil Jones describes the death of sceptic, John Daly, as “cheering news”.(1075403821)

Phil Jones encourages colleagues to delete information subject to FoI request.(1212063122)


Phil Jones says he has use Mann’s “Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series”…to hide the decline”. Real Climate says “hiding” was an unfortunate turn of phrase.(0942777075)


Letter to The Times from climate scientists was drafted with the help of Greenpeace.(0872202064)


Mann thinks he will contact BBC’s Richard Black to find out why another BBC journalist was allowed to publish a vaguely sceptical article.(1255352257)


Source:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/22/bishop-hills-compendium-of-cru-email-issues/



And there are many, many more emails available, a veritable zoo of fraud and deciet.

 
At 15 February, 2010 18:01, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

And now that I thionk of it......

Yet more proof that the Twoooofers™ are full of shit.

Someone, either a hacker or a whistleblower ( I prefer the whistleblower theory) blew apart a carefully constructed fiction, one that had lasted for God knows how many years, was bought outright and pushed by the MSM, used by politicians in unconsionable power grabs, adn accepted by the easily influenced.

One person exposed it all.

Where's the one person who'll expose the WTC conspiracy? Nowhere to be found.

Because there is no conspiracy.

 
At 16 February, 2010 08:44, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

Look at that! NY,er shows some common sense and points out the obvious about the obscenely swollen and corrupted military related budgets and he's slapped down by resident Neanderthal PornBoy.You want to talk about cults,get a load of the Chief Bozo browbeating incorrect thinkers among the acolytes!! Coming along quite nicely on bass there NY,er-you really hit the nail on the head when it comes to the Imperialist Soldier,Troglodyte cold warrior PornBoy a/k/a Ronbo, the greasy,smarmy public access schnook.

 
At 16 February, 2010 09:22, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

All conspiracy theories are equal, but some conspiracy theories are more equal than others.

Eh? Dorothy?


What a delight to see the hypocrisy in full swing on this blog.

 
At 16 February, 2010 09:28, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

Let me guess.

Wikipedia is to be trusted on 9/11


...but not on climate change!!

ROFLMAO...you guys are awesome!!

Awesome!! I love it! Gorgeous!!!

Come over here for a big hug...you rascals you.

 
At 16 February, 2010 09:42, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

Oh...one more thing..

I especially like the:

"My xxx(-fill in relative-) is fighting in yyyy to protect your freedom to say bullshit!"

- meme.

You know why?

Because since 2001, the freedoms these soldiers are supposedly fighting for, have been ANNIHILATED BY THE STROKE OF A PEN.

THE PRESIDENT'S PEN.

The Constitution is "Just a Goddamn piece of paper"...remember?

The hypocrisy! The irony!

It's like there's this whole repertoire of bullshit propaganda memes, just laying around..waiting to be kicked into action by Fox-News copycat mouthpiece propaganda drones such as Dorothy.

Got an opinion? Only by virtue of our army fighting abroad! Got dissent? You're a fucking terrorist sympathizer! Criticize Israel? You're a Holocaust denier! Want a more reasonable distribution of wealth? You're commie filth! Think the government is capable of doing bad things? You're fit for the lunatic asylum! Anti-torture? You're inviting the country to be attacked again!

I mean...what a joy it must be to have a whole script of this bullcrap handy which will, if need be, be backed up by highly paid corporate/CIA propaganda shills such as Glenn Beck, together with titillating graphics and animations.

 
At 16 February, 2010 11:13, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Roid Rage said...
Let me guess.

Wikipedia is to be trusted on 9/11


...but not on climate change!!"

Um, fucktard, who's using Wikipedia?

Maybe you wanna brush up on those reading comprehension skills, child.


"Roid Rage said...
Oh...one more thing..

I especially like the:

"My xxx(-fill in relative-) is fighting in yyyy to protect your freedom to say bullshit!"

- meme.

You know why?"

Becasue you're not good enough to lick the sand from my sons combat boots, child.

 
At 16 February, 2010 11:23, Anonymous GuitarBill said...

Raging Diaper scribbles, "...The Constitution is 'Just a Goddamn piece of paper'...remember?"

Only one problem, Bush never said anything of the sort.

"...Question: Did President Bush call the Constitution a 'goddamned piece of paper?'

"Is it true that President Bush called the Constitution a 'goddamned piece of paper?' He has never denied it, and it appears that there were several witnesses.

"
Answer: Extremely unlikely. The Web site that reported those words has a history of quoting phony sources and retracting bogus stories.

"The report that Bush 'screamed' those words at Republican congressional leaders in November 2005 is unsubstantiated, to put it charitably.

"We judge that the odds that the report is accurate hover near zero. It comes from Capitol Hill Blue, a Web site that has a history of relying on phony sources, retracting stories and apologizing to its readers."


Source: FactCheck: Did President Bush call the Constitution a "goddamned piece of paper?".

And you wonder why we don't trust the so called "9/11 truth movement".

 
At 16 February, 2010 11:27, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Only one problem, Bush never said anything of the sort."

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA!!!!

raging pantload gets caughjt out in another lie.

What a mook.

 
At 16 February, 2010 14:09, Anonymous NoIdentity said...

Because since 2001, the freedoms these soldiers are supposedly fighting for, have been ANNIHILATED BY THE STROKE OF A PEN.
While the PATRIOT ACT is fair game to criticize, it does no one any good to wildly exaggerate the state of out freedoms. The 1st amendment is doing just fine, so is the 2nd, though I suspect you wish otherwise.
I constantly hear this slippery slope argument. But really what has changed? Wire tapping is nothing new and certainly didn't start under bush. If you don't know about ECHELON you're behind on your civil libertarian research (It started under Clinton). Detaining American citizens indefinitely by presidential decree is concerning but again, it hasn't been demonstrably abused and the Supreme Court has rebuked the Executive Branch on several fronts in this regard.
The idea that we've lost ALL OUR FREEDOMS OMG is really getting old.

 
At 16 February, 2010 14:15, Anonymous NoIdentity said...


Got an opinion? Only by virtue of our army fighting abroad! Got dissent? You're a fucking terrorist sympathizer! Criticize Israel? You're a Holocaust denier! Want a more reasonable distribution of wealth? You're commie filth! Think the government is capable of doing bad things? You're fit for the lunatic asylum! Anti-torture? You're inviting the country to be attacked again!

Aren't you the one always bitching about straw-men?
This site is not populated solely by hybrids of Pat Robertson and Curtis LeMay. Whenever the anti-zionism canard is discussed more than a few on "the debunker side" (Cowboys and Indians?) point out that Israel's settlements are a bad thing and that our blind support for them is bad as well. It's a bridge to far, however, to accuse Israel of manipulating the entire American media, presumably through a vast Jewish cabal.
You need to stop watching Fox News because you're starting to think the entire country marches to Glen Beck's orders! It's really not as bad as you're making it out to be.

 
At 16 February, 2010 14:20, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

"Becasue you're not good enough to lick the sand from my sons combat boots, child."

Fuck your son, and fuck his service. Are we clear?

 
At 16 February, 2010 14:28, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Roid Rage said...
"Becasue you're not good enough to lick the sand from my sons combat boots, child."

Fuck your son, and fuck his service. Are we clear?"

Sure am.

Coward.

 
At 16 February, 2010 14:33, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

Oh, and raging pantload?

Your eyelid is ticing, child.

 
At 16 February, 2010 14:34, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

If you don't know about ECHELON you're behind on your civil libertarian research (It started under Clinton).

Heh. If you only knew.

 
At 16 February, 2010 14:36, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

Your eyelid is ticing, child.
PFFFLLLRRRT.

AAAAAH.

This is me taking a giant dump on your son and his "service". =)

 
At 16 February, 2010 14:40, Anonymous paul w said...

"Got an opinion? Only by virtue of our army fighting abroad!"

This might come as a shock, but in many of those places, an opinion can mean death.

You are right, in one sense; our freedom of opinion has been fought and won by military might.

It's unfortunate that it has to be so, but there it is.

"Got dissent? You're a fucking terrorist sympathizer!"

Yet another wild generalization.

Truthers are not dissenters, they are delusional paranoids who ignore who are the terrorists on 9-11 (hint: google fundamentalist religious nutcakes) and blame the US administration (and the rest of the population who are not truthers) on the act.

The world has far too many graves of genuine dissenters who died fighting totalitarian regimes.

The truther efforts to associate themselves with such people is to be deplored.

"Criticize Israel? You're a Holocaust denier!"

Wrong, again. A few of the posters here have made clear their criticism of some Israeli policies.

The problem with truthers is that many of its Israeli criticism is from genuine Holocaust deniers. Does the name Kevin Barrett ring a bell?

"Want a more reasonable distribution of wealth? You're commie filth!"

I've yet to see that belief echoed here. And, personally, yes I would like to see a more reasonable distribution of wealth. Nurses could do with a pay rise, to start with.

"Think the government is capable of doing bad things? You're fit for the lunatic asylum!"

Talk about wide of the mark...
Do you actually READ any of the posts?

Also, most truthers are not severe enough for the lunatic asylum, but certainly professional help.

"Anti-torture? You're inviting the country to be attacked again!"

Is you entire world view based on wild exaggerations and generalities, or is this a passing phase?

PS seek professional help.

 
At 16 February, 2010 14:45, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Roid Rage said...
Your eyelid is ticing, child.
PFFFLLLRRRT.

AAAAAH.

This is me taking a giant dump on your son and his "service". =)

Sure thing.

Coward.

And now the vein in your forehead is throbbing again.

Coward.

 
At 16 February, 2010 14:48, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Want a more reasonable distribution of wealth? You're commie filth!"

That's true.

 
At 16 February, 2010 15:02, Anonymous paul w said...

I was expecting that

 
At 16 February, 2010 15:07, Anonymous NoIdentity said...

Heh. If you only knew.
Oh no you di'en![snaps fingers]
I'm pretty sure I know. I'm just not outraged. But then again I am a cynic with low expectations.

 
At 16 February, 2010 15:17, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

I'm pretty sure I know.

Naah. Trust me on this one. It's much worse than you think.

No wait. Nevermind.

 
At 16 February, 2010 15:22, Anonymous NoIdentity said...

On what do you base your knowledge about ECHELON and other surveillance capabilities of the Anglo-American intelligence community?
It's only "bad" if you think it's being misused.

 
At 16 February, 2010 15:33, Anonymous NoIdentity said...

And of course, one man's "misuse" is another man's "defense of national security."

 
At 16 February, 2010 15:44, Anonymous NoIdentity said...

lol look what's at the top of my favorite conspiriblog!
http://cryptogon.com/?p=13775
Is that your blog RR?
(I know it's not)

 
At 16 February, 2010 15:46, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Roid Rage said...
I'm pretty sure I know.

Naah. Trust me on this one. It's much worse than you think.

No wait. Nevermind."

Now the coward is an all knowing insider.

Riiiiiiiight.

 
At 16 February, 2010 15:50, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

http://cryptogon.com/?p=13775

Wow, Noidentity, they REALLY bring Teh Krazy.

 
At 16 February, 2010 15:52, Anonymous NoIdentity said...

Hey I didn't say I believe everything he says! Just that it's my favorite conspiracy site.

 
At 16 February, 2010 15:53, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

This might come as a shock, but in many of those places, an opinion can mean death.

You are right, in one sense; our freedom of opinion has been fought and won by military might.

It's unfortunate that it has to be so, but there it is.

War is peace.

Truthers are not dissenters, they are delusional paranoids who ignore who are the terrorists on 9-11 (hint: google fundamentalist religious nutcakes) and blame the US administration (and the rest of the population who are not truthers) on the act.
9/11 family members
80000 New Yorkers

The world has far too many graves of genuine dissenters who died fighting totalitarian regimes.
Glenn Beck good. Socialism bad.

The truther efforts to associate themselves with such people is to be deplored.
Your efforts to anoint yourself supreme referee of acceptable dissent is appalling.

Wrong, again. A few of the posters here have made clear their criticism of some Israeli policies.
Who cares?

The problem with truthers is that many of its Israeli criticism is from genuine Holocaust deniers. Does the name Kevin Barrett ring a bell?
911blogger, for example, has a strict anti-Holocaust denial policy. One of the most prominent 9/11 truthers, Jon Gold, is Jewish. Kevin Barrett, on the other hand, is one of the most non-prominent 9/11 truthers, and is frowned upon by many. Personally, I despise Holocaust deniers.

I've yet to see that belief echoed here. And, personally, yes I would like to see a more reasonable distribution of wealth. Nurses could do with a pay rise, to start with.
Well, Dorothy's response proved you wrong, didn't it. And he represents a large contingent of braindead zealots with family members killing arabs and persians abroad for SUV.

Talk about wide of the mark...
Do you actually READ any of the posts?

Also, most truthers are not severe enough for the lunatic asylum, but certainly professional help.

YOU: (just a few sentences ago, LOL) "Truthers are not dissenters, they are delusional paranoids"

Is you entire world view based on wild exaggerations and generalities, or is this a passing phase?
Yawn. You aren't fooling anyone.

Source #1
Source #2

(Now STFU.)

PS seek professional help.
Seek employment as a crash test dummy at Toyota. I heard they have vacancies, and since you already got the "dummy" part nailed down, you're the perfect candidate. Let me know how your second day on the job went.

 
At 16 February, 2010 15:57, Anonymous NoIdentity said...

Oh come on you just HAD to bring poor Toyota into this?!
What are those sources for?
Gawker, ironically, is very good about debunking conspiracy theories. I saw them calling out Huffington Post for her shameless promotion of anti-vax nonsense. Why is a Gossip site the vanguard of reason?

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

On what do you base your knowledge about ECHELON and other surveillance capabilities of the Anglo-American intelligence community?

I could only have gained such knowledge from the internet.

 
At 16 February, 2010 16:05, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

Anonymous = Roid Rage, apologies.s

 
At 16 February, 2010 16:08, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"The world has far too many graves of genuine dissenters who died fighting totalitarian regimes.
Glenn Beck good. Socialism bad."

The margin of error in estimating the number of people murdered under communism is actually larger than the Nazi Holocaust.

Bet you're real proud of that fact, aren't you, coward?



"(Now STFU.)"

The coward fascist speaks.

 
At 16 February, 2010 16:09, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"And he represents a large contingent of braindead zealots with family members killing arabs and persians abroad for SUV."

Actually, my son is deployed in the States right now, although he has had two tours in the ME.

Which is two tours more than the resident coward.

 
At 16 February, 2010 16:17, Anonymous paul w said...

"Well, Dorothy's response proved you wrong, didn't it"

It didn't. LL's comment was made after mine, so my comment still stands, and, is true.

Wrong, again, RR.

"And he represents a large contingent of braindead zealots with family members killing arabs and persians abroad for SUV."

Your efforts to anoint yourself supreme referee of what the family members of serving defense forces believe, is appalling.

"Truthers are not dissenters, they are delusional paranoids"

As I said, they need professional help, not the asylum.

And, leave Toyota outta this. The Corolla is a legend in OZ.

PS seek professional help

 
At 16 February, 2010 16:21, Anonymous NoIdentity said...

I could only have gained such knowledge from the internet.

That's not specific at all! I read about Elvis sightings all the time on the internet!
Well not really, but you get the point.

 
At 16 February, 2010 16:26, Anonymous NoIdentity said...

And he represents a large contingent of braindead zealots with family members killing arabs and persians abroad for SUV.

We're not killing Persians yet! Don't get ahead of yourself!
And really, SUVs? Don't you think that's a little simplistic? Not to mention the worst of stereotypical grievances against American society.

 
At 16 February, 2010 16:37, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"And really, SUVs? Don't you think that's a little simplistic? Not to mention the worst of stereotypical grievances against American society."

Well, if you think about it, simplistic stereotypes are typical of the cowardly reactionary leftist.

Facts, to this ilk, are like garlic to Dracula.

Add to that in actuality the coward is a paranoid conpiratard, and you got the complete insane package.

 
At 16 February, 2010 16:38, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

The margin of error in estimating the number of people murdered under communism is actually larger than the Nazi Holocaust.

Bet you're real proud of that fact, aren't you, coward?

"(Now STFU.)"

The coward fascist speaks.


Communism, socialism, fascism.

All the same, right Dorothy?

The ape-like intellect speaks. LOL.

 
At 16 February, 2010 16:42, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

It didn't. LL's comment was made after mine, so my comment still stands, and, is true.

Wrong, again, RR.

HAHAHAHAHA

As I said, they need professional help, not the asylum.
Whatever.

And, leave Toyota outta this. The Corolla is a legend in OZ.
Oh. Okay. Still. Apply.

PS seek professional help
Seek a mountain top in a thunderstorm with an umbrella in your hand. Let me know of any shocking revelations.

 
At 16 February, 2010 16:45, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

Facts, to this ilk, are like garlic to Dracula.

Add to that in actuality the coward is a paranoid conpiratard, and you got the complete insane package.


Fully agree with you Dorothy. Especially those climate skeptics. Put them in a straight jacket and in isolation, with their moronic paranoid fantasies about a global conspiracy to establish socialism through eco-reform.

 
At 16 February, 2010 16:48, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

We're not killing Persians yet! Don't get ahead of yourself!
Aren't we? NoID...this disappoints me. I hold you in higher regard than the other twats here. Please don't ask me to explain this. It would demean us both.

 
At 16 February, 2010 16:49, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

That's not specific at all! I read about Elvis sightings all the time on the internet! Well not really, but you get the point.

Yep. I concede.

 
At 16 February, 2010 16:56, Anonymous NoIdentity said...

Jundallah and the MEK don't count. That's probably Israel and Saudi Arabia's doing (strange times make strange bedfellows) anyways. Our soldiers aren't killing them.
Although I'm sure there are some Revolutionary Guard working in Iraq that we've killed but that's their own damn fault.
I doubt it though. Iraq is already about as pro-Iranian as it can get without formally joining the Islamic Republic.
It amuses me that the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq is now just the Supreme Islamic Council. The Revolution took place courtesy of American blood and treasure.
Ah democracy! Isn't it glorious?

 
At 16 February, 2010 16:57, Anonymous NoIdentity said...

I hold you in higher regard than the other twats here.
I told you I'm not a fox! More like an owl. Owls don't eat ravens do they?

 
At 16 February, 2010 17:06, Anonymous paul w said...

"It didn't. LL's comment was made after mine, so my comment still stands, and, is true.
HAHAHAHAHA"


'It still is'

Okay, I meant that the comment made at the time, was true.

And, it was.

Well, at least you can see other people's mistakes. None as blind as those that cannot see, eh, RR?

 
At 16 February, 2010 17:13, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

NoIdentity:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_Afghanistan

Sigh. :(

 
At 16 February, 2010 17:15, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

paul w, could you please upload your last comment as an audio recording somewhere?

 
At 16 February, 2010 17:24, Anonymous NoIdentity said...

Oh come on! That is such a technicality...
Persians are Farsi speaking Iranians (right?). If you really wanted to be a technical bitch you could say Persians are only people from Fars province but I don't think Iranians see it that way.
There are some Persians in Herat but they aren't really represented in the people-who-shoot-at-us-iban. The Tajiks and Pashtun are indo-Aryan peoples who speak Iranian languages but that doesn't make them Persian. Does your Tajik friend call himself a Persian?
I could be wrong on this, ethic identity issues in Afghanistan are... very complicated to say the least.
I thought you were trying to say we were already attacking Iran with over troops, which is clearly not the case. Let us hope it stays that way, I like being able to fill up my gas tank.

 
At 16 February, 2010 17:25, Anonymous NoIdentity said...

*overt troops. As opposed to covert special operators.

 
At 16 February, 2010 19:06, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

" NoIdentity said...
Oh come on! That is such a technicality..."

That's all the coward has.

He can prove any of his conspiritard ravenings, so he jumps on every minor error, typo and slight mistatement that any of the sane posters make.

Just your average, run of the mill child, too immature to make an actual argument.

It'd be pitiful if it weren't so funny.

 
At 16 February, 2010 19:09, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Communism, socialism, fascism.

All the same, right Dorothy?"

Um, no. I never said that, coward.

(See what I mean? Nothing rational to say, so the coward sets up armies of straw men to attack.

Pitiful, really)

BTW, coward, what's with the "Dorothy" thing?

You talking to the voices in your head or something?

 
At 17 February, 2010 01:50, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

Does your Tajik friend call himself a Persian?
Yes, and he's not the only one. I just wanted to make a point about the generalized "arab" denominator for everybody the US army is fighting though.

 
At 17 February, 2010 01:52, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

You talking to the voices in your head or something?
LOL

You're the gift that just keeps on giving, Dorothy.

<3

 
At 17 February, 2010 05:05, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"You're the gift that just keeps on giving, Dorothy."

You seem strangely fascinated with my usernmae, coward.

Considering tht you've named yourself after a drug-inuced, self inflicted psychosis, which manifests itself as aggression, violence, and mania.

And testicular atrophy.

But that would explain a lot.


And what's with the "Dorothy"? One of the voices in your head?

 
At 17 February, 2010 05:30, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

Considering tht you've named yourself after a drug-inuced, self inflicted psychosis, which manifests itself as aggression, violence, and mania.

And testicular atrophy.


Well, I didn't. NoIdentity/Bjorn/Marylander/whatever did. I gave me a good chuckle. Of course, terminal airheads like you, Dorothy, aren't predisposed to differentiate.

Which is why you were dense enough to name yourself after the protagonist in a set of books that portray "time travel, parallel dimensions, free love, consensual incest, and a concept that Heinlein named pantheistic solipsism—the theory that universes are created by the act of imagining them, such that somewhere the Land of Oz is real."

That is, if you're not busy "snatching your mother out of the time stream and replacing her with a dead clone"

ROFLMAO, just shut the fuck up, weirdo, and go spank the yellow ribbon.

 
At 17 February, 2010 07:21, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Roid Rage said... "


"Well, I didn't."

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA!!!!!


Um, that's a pretty fucking idiotic statement.

Considering you call youself raging pantload, or whatever.

"ROFLMAO, just shut the fuck up, weirdo, and go spank the yellow ribbon."

I actually have a blue service star flag hanging in my front window, coward.

What do your parents have, bars to keep you out?

BTW, you seem strangely fascinated with incest.

Any particular reason? Does Uncle Charlie play hide the hogie with you or something?

 
At 17 February, 2010 07:21, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

And who's Dorothy?

Your sister?

 
At 17 February, 2010 09:02, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

BTW, you seem strangely fascinated with incest.

Any particular reason? Does Uncle Charlie play hide the hogie with you or something?


Hmmm. I thought you were the one who named yourself after a character that fucks his mother, Dorothy. Don't blame me for pointing it out!

<3

 
At 17 February, 2010 09:40, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

And who's Dorothy?

Your sister?

 
At 17 February, 2010 09:59, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

PornBoy says that Poppy was out of the loop and that it was just a coincidence that thousands of tons of cocaine were being flown into the country via CIA front companies.The blowhard ultra Nationalist is clearly insane.

 
At 17 February, 2010 10:03, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Arhoolie said...
PornBoy says that Poppy was out of the loop and that it was just a coincidence that thousands of tons of cocaine were being flown into the country via CIA front companies.The blowhard ultra Nationalist is clearly insane."

Krazee is out on work release again.

Any bets on how long it'll be before they kick him out of the library?

 
At 17 February, 2010 11:05, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

Any bets on how long it'll be before they kick him out of the library?

Have you even ever been inside one, trailer park mullet drop out piece of shit?

You'd be the first to join the book barbecue when the brownshirts take full control.

 
At 17 February, 2010 12:04, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"You'd be the first to join the book barbecue when the brownshirts take full control."

My personal libray is, well, very large, you brick-brained ignoramus.

Now, tell us, is Dorothy your sister?

 
At 17 February, 2010 13:58, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

In PornBoy's lunatic view using a library is grounds for a right ribbing! The guy is just plain nuts.

 
At 17 February, 2010 14:26, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Arhoolie said...
In PornBoy's lunatic view using a library is grounds for a right ribbing! The guy is just plain nuts."

Could someone translate that into Sane for me?

 
At 17 February, 2010 14:28, Anonymous NoIdentity said...

Yes, and he's not the only one.
Seriously? No one knows Tajiks exist anyways. All brown Muslims are ay-rabs, duh! But seriously that's interesting, I didn't know they identified so readily with Iran/Persia as the linguistic connection is very old. So I guess Iran has spread its tentacles into Afghanistan as well, courtesy of the US wiping out it's other enemy the Taliban.
You know there's a very popular conspiracy theory among some Arabs that Iran and the US are secretly working together? I can kinda see why they think so. I'm definitely willing to entertain the idea that Chalabi was an Iranian agent.
"It is good to strike the serpents head with your enemy's hand"

 
At 18 February, 2010 04:01, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

"My personal libray is, well, very large, you brick-brained ignoramus."

Right, you ass pilfering homo defectus, let's see what kind of titles you've got on the shelf.

* "Anal sex for closet homosexuals part II"
* "Hitler was a commie!"
* "Climate Change: the leftist conspiracy"
* "Why You Have Freedom Of Speech Because My Son Shoots Terrrrrists"
* "Selective senses: how to block out inconvenient truth from ever reaching your thought processes"
* "Recipes for rainy days in the trailer park"
* "How to be a traitor and a patriot at the same time"
* "Freedom is a privilege"
* "9/11: the ultimate propaganda schtick"
* "9/11: How to blame the democrats only"
* "Sex with animals: do's and don'ts"
* "Encyclopedia of dissentless flagsucking for the professional stooge"
* "Black people for president: how it violates the Constitution"
* "The left-wing vs right-wing paradigm: how to exploit it to obfuscate the real issues - 14th print"
* "Troy Sexton - The Wonders Of Physical Violence in Pedagogy"
* "Troy Sexton - Dealing With Intermittent Explosive Disorder"
* "Troy Sexton - How to stalk traumatized victims and gloat about it"
* "Lazarus Long: How I traveled back in time and impregnated my mother with myself"
* "The dictionary of platitudes, hasty generalizations and intellectual lazyness: impressing people with your stupidity"
* "Dissent and terrorism: apples from the same tree by Karl Rove"
* "Wiretapping - You aren't against it if you have nothing to hide by Michael Hayden"
* "Torture and freedom: how one guarantees the other by Dick Cheney"
* "Dyslexicon of shape-shifting neoconservative propaganda and McCarthyism - How I did it all for the money by Glenn Beck"

Impressive! Everything I expected, Dorothy!

Now, tell us, is Dorothy your sister?
Oooh. Dorothy. You are Dorothy, Dorothy.

 
At 18 February, 2010 04:46, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

"So I guess Iran has spread its tentacles into Afghanistan as well, courtesy of the US wiping out it's other enemy the Taliban."

That's a bit of an odd way to put it. Anthropological history of the region need not necessarily be dependent on the established nation borders. Isn't Afghanistan the prime example of how a nation is kept on life-support, while there isn't much that binds the various peoples in the various regions together?

Isn't Kurdistan another? How about former Yugoslavia? Borders are just lines, demarcations. Without added history of strong national unity, perhaps centuries long, they can serve to obfuscate the true ethno-social relations. Other examples come to mind, like the various tribes in Africa and the rather arbitrary borders drawn by we, the colonialists and imperialists.

 
At 18 February, 2010 06:24, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Roid Rage said...
"My personal libray is, well, very large, you brick-brained ignoramus."

Right, you ass pilfering homo defectus, let's see what kind of titles you've got on the shelf."

My goodness, that was.....pitiful.

 
At 18 February, 2010 06:24, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

Now, tell us, is Dorothy your sister?

 
At 18 February, 2010 06:56, Anonymous Roid Rage said...

"My goodness, that was.....pitiful.

Now, tell us, is Dorothy your sister?"

Bahahahaha. Dorothy. Nice comeback...not! LOLOL! <3

 
At 18 February, 2010 09:33, Anonymous NoIdentity said...

That's a bit of an odd way to put it. Anthropological history of the region need not necessarily be dependent on the established nation borders.
Tentacles was perhaps an inflammatory way of putting it. Northern Afghanistan had been in Iran's sphere of influence for a long long time before Russia and Britain showed up. Now that they are both finally gone (or at least 1,000 miles north) and the only thing stopping Iran from reestablishing influence in that area was Taliban, who are no longer in control. Iran should establish influence in Afghanistan, they have every right to.
Although as far as borders go, Iran has some of the more logical ones for that part of the world. They have a Persian core with Azeri, Kurdish and Arab population buffering their western border, but ultimately that western border runs the spine of the Zagros mountains... till you get down to southern Iraq where there is no natural boundary and hence constant conflict with her Arab neighbor. The eastern borders are in the middle of giant deserts that no one cares to fight over. It's a pretty defensible nation, I don't get why they're so paranoid!
(Ok I do)
The Kurds really got screwed out of a country. I blame the disproportionate influence of the Turks on Anglo-American map-making in the first half of the 20th century.
Africa's borders are somewhat different because until we showed up there were very few settled populations. Most of the peoples were nomadic so the idea of permanent borders probably sounded silly to them.

 
At 18 February, 2010 21:24, Anonymous paul w said...

"Northern Afghanistan had been in Iran's sphere of influence"

Afghanistan. Imagine living in a country with neighbors like that.

What else, but trouble?

 
At 19 February, 2010 10:35, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

" Roid Rage said...
"He was on the sidelines cheering the fascists on.

Nice pom-poms by the way."

PWWWFFFFRRRT!!

This is me taking a big, smelly, damn near toxic dump on your son's military service again, neo-fascist."


Bears repeating.

Just to expose to the world what a child you truly are.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home