Thursday, May 20, 2010

Clueless

I just love this post over at 9-11 Flogger from an Aussie twit named Naomi Breeze who thinks she scored a major victory for 9-11 Troof. A NYC firefighter named Dan Daly was giving a speech at a local church.

Dan then repeated his comments at which point I stood up and addressed the audience for one minute, mainly telling them that the victims’ family members wanted people to see this evidence. I mentioned Fire Fighters for 9/11 Truth, Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth and Religious Leaders for 9/11 Truth (the Monsignor nearly fell off his chair). I asked Dan if he had seen the peer reviewed and unchallenged scientific paper concerning the presence of thermite in the dust samples and he said “I don’t want to see it.” I attempted to hand him a copy but he refused to take it.

I then told the audience that I had plenty of information and DVDs for them. At this point there were a few cries of “sit down” and the Chaplain stood up and said “why don’t you find a nice man, get married and have babies.” I kid you not. I rolled my eyes and sat down. You could hear a pin drop. More questions from the audience including “are there actually two Seattle’s?”


Her success:

I made a teenage girl cry. She was upset that I was “rude to a hero.” I explained that in my opinion the true heroes were the people fighting for 9/11 Truth and told her it was wonderful to see her compassion and to get in touch once she had looked at the information because we needed kind and caring people like her. By the end she was okay. I think she was just a bit shocked. I was too. I’ve never made anyone cry about 9/11 Truth before.


Are you kidding me? And get this:

Dan bolted out the back door as the Chaplain stood there stunned. I told the Chaplain that “the reason he won’t talk to me is because he knows I’m right.”


No, the reason he won't talk to you is that he knows you're a crackpot.

Labels:

35 Comments:

At 20 May, 2010 12:12, Blogger Dave Kyte said...

peer reviewed? and unchallenged? scientific paper?

Wow, could you not get it more wrong?

 
At 20 May, 2010 12:15, Blogger avicenne said...

Dan should be saluted for the following witticism, "I saw a TV show about this and it was called Bullshit."

"Dan ignored me...I was now the most unpopular person in the room..."

I wonder why?

"The sad part is that Dan is a truly fantastic speaker...If only he was one of us."

One of us, one of us, one of us...

 
At 20 May, 2010 13:26, Anonymous Anonymous said...

OT, but I thought this spoof seemed relevant:

Through deployment of algorithms, Google works out the source of your fears, and matches them to the appropriate comforting version of events. The blogosphere and online forums will be heuristically searched for credible sources of anonymous postings. ... For example, a user can select ‘I blame the United States for 9/11′, and instantly numerous credible-looking websites will appear substantiating your assertion.

 
At 20 May, 2010 13:31, Blogger William said...

yup another truther thumping their holy scriptures as "truth". the truth is "unestablished, undemonstrated, pseudoscience".

 
At 20 May, 2010 14:09, Blogger Billman said...

You know, the troofers really should get together to form just one giant group called "Paranoid Self-Congratulating Ego Masturbation by Public Embarassment for 9/11 Truth," because that's really all they've EVER accomplished, and they always call doing just that a "major victory" for some reason.

Remember that WAC vid some months back? With a John McCain speech that was dubbed to the theme from Halloween and then it showed two douchebags chasing McCain down and calling him a "Scum BAAAAAAG!" as he politely drove away from these lunatics?

The comments on that YouTube video from other troofers were, of course, "Great job!" and "Score a major victory!" Etc... and I'm sure there is equal retardation on the 911blogger comments going on right now, for this woman making a teenager cry (which, I believe sounds completely made up because its almost movie cliche-ish).

And when people like, say, The Widows or Jersey Girls (as part of the Family Steering Commitee) actually get something accomplished without embarassing themselves, they then have to do something to throw their reputations under the bus by saying something loony (like, releasing a statement that says they're were satisfied by the 9/11 commission and what it helped changed, then a few months later writing a letter to a senator and saying "nah, nevermind. INSIDE JOBBY JOB!" It's almost a troofer requirement or something.

 
At 20 May, 2010 14:14, Anonymous mr slippyfist said...

stupid bitch naomi breeze said:

"Dan bolted out the back door as the Chaplain stood there stunned. I told the Chaplain that “the reason he won’t talk to me is because he knows I’m right.”

LMAO! wrong you dumb bitch! he just knows how stupid truthers are,how they ignore evidence, they believe stupid lies made up by gage,jones and bursill, they can't learn anything new that disproves their stupid fantasy.its easier to train a cat to use an indoor flush toilet then to teach a stupid truther what happened on 911.
if i was there at the church i would have at least hosed her down with the fire hose. stupid halfwitted truthers they really piss me off!

 
At 20 May, 2010 14:24, Blogger Billman said...

Did Arhoolie just go Debunker?

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

Well, I was right. Apparently there's a massive troof circle jerk going on at 911blogger. I'm guessing any minute they're going to crown Naomi as their queen. I'm surprised she hasn't come to THIS blog yet, like they all do eventually, to argue her side and call us all "afraid of the implications" or something.

 
At 20 May, 2010 17:00, Blogger angrysoba said...

What a fucking bitch!

This is funny: “why don’t you find a nice man, get married and have babies.”

This is quite a succinct analysis of what is essentially wrong with the majority of Truthers. Unloved misfits who become more misfitty by the day as they trawl the Internet for more and more wacky crap.

Good on those in the church who told her to shut up!

 
At 20 May, 2010 17:13, Blogger angrysoba said...

By the way, some idiot who thinks the sinking of the South Korean vessel is a false flag attack and has put up the Truther shield of steel, which is to not debate anyone who can show he's talking crap. Oh, and who does he name as making a compelling investigation into 9/11?

Christopher Bollyn!

http://tinyurl.com/2fbp6hs

 
At 20 May, 2010 18:08, Anonymous Anonymous said...

" I explained that in my opinion the true heroes were the people fighting for 9/11 Truth "

sickening.

Attempted stolen valor at its lowest form. Faux wanabee heroes who never be as brave as people who run into burning buildings, so they try to steal the glory. The 'bravest' thing they can ever do is disrupt a church service with a fake paper. Big win.

 
At 20 May, 2010 18:37, Blogger Billman said...

Attempted stolen valor at its lowest form. Faux wanabee heroes who never be as brave as people who run into burning buildings, so they try to steal the glory. The 'bravest' thing they can ever do is disrupt a church service with a fake paper. Big win.

Yes, and according to the comments at 911blogger it's also a "slam dunk!" and a "critical moment" and one of the "most inspirational and well-written 9/11 truth stories" by a "9/11 Truth Heroine". She's a HEROINE, way more so than the guy speaking whom she rudely interrupted, right? In fact, that's what MAKES her a Heroine, because it was the perfect time and place to say her drivel..

Just ask her:

"Most people told me I was rude and that this wasn’t the time and place (not true) and that I had arrived with an agenda (true)."

Yes. A true Heroine. Because she arrived with "an agenda" to be rude at the right time and place.

A slam dunk, definately.

Inspiring one troofer to, qoute: "Naomi's responses are just superb. I hope to learn from this example, and to imitate it in detail if I can, to any extent that I can."

Yay! What a Heroine! amright, guys?

 
At 20 May, 2010 18:37, Anonymous Anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

 
At 20 May, 2010 19:11, Blogger Billman said...

You know, one of us should really start going to these things, if only to counter the inevitable rude troofer interrupter.

Maybe I will go to the skeptics thing, Anonymous...

 
At 20 May, 2010 19:47, Blogger angrysoba said...

What an utter fucking bitch!

One lady told me she didn’t need any information because she had been to New York. Another lady said that 9/11 was ages ago and it doesn’t matter because it won’t bring back the deceased people. An Engineer told me he had looked at the evidence and didn’t believe it. I responded to these remarks with the standard replies.


What are the standard replies? Changing the subject? Letting loose a torrent of Trutherbabble? JAQing off in the middle of the church? Calling the old lady, the other lady and the engineers shills?

I made a teenage girl cry. She was upset that I was “rude to a hero.” I explained that in my opinion the true heroes were the people fighting for 9/11 Truth and told her it was wonderful to see her compassion and to get in touch once she had looked at the information because we needed kind and caring people like her. By the end she was okay. I think she was just a bit shocked. I was too. I’ve never made anyone cry about 9/11 Truth before.

Fucking stupid thick bitch!

The sad part is that Dan is a truly fantastic speaker. He has that awesome Bronx accent and looked great in his FDNY uniform. If only he was one of us.

One of us! One of us! Gooble-gobble, gooble-gobble!

I imagine those Truther Freaks chant this when they induct a new member.

 
At 20 May, 2010 21:15, Blogger Billman said...

No no, angrysoba, you're doing it wrong. She's a 9/11 Truth Heroine. Remember?

Which, in english, could mean the other thing.

 
At 20 May, 2010 21:31, Blogger Billman said...

Anyway, I arrived a couple of minutes late but was warmly welcomed to the front row by the Chaplain. There were about 60 regular churchgoers in attendance but unfortunately no fire fighters.

Yes, well it IS Newcastle Austrailia. Unless you were hoping for Austrailian firefighters.

Dan’s talk was interesting and inspirational, despite reference to the pancake theory and namedropping Colin Powell and Henry Kissinger, both of whom he had given speeches for at their request.

So it was ok, despite him referencing what there's actual evidence for and mentioning other things he had done that had nothing to do with 9/11 troof? Yes, how dare he.

He also discussed the high temperatures and continual fires at Ground Zero at which point I raised my hand and said “there was molten metal.”

Which is based off of speculation from a second hand source. Only Mark Loizeaux ever said there was "molten metal" and he was saying he HEARD that from a worker and never actually SAW it himself.

At this point on this blog, 9/11 troofers will usually come on here to link a YouTube video with some fire fighters talking, but the fire fighters in the video never specifically say motlen metal, or molten steel.

Dan then asked if anyone had any questions:

Me: Do you support the victims’ family members who are demanding a new independent investigation into the events of September 11 based on the new scientific evidence that has come to light concerning controlled demolition and the presence of the explosive, thermite, in the dust samples?


Fair question. No harm in asking.

Dan: (seething with anger)

Really? "seething" with anger? Right. Over-dramatizing, I bet. Or is Dan an asshole to 9/11 troofers and would get all hot and bothered in public and surely wouldn't be used to this kind of thing by now?

I saw a TV show about this and it was called Bullshit which is what I think of this crap. This girl is from one of these fringe groups who have sprung up that believe no planes hit the Twin Towers.

He's assuming here that she's a no-planer. She hasn't actually said she was.

Me: That is incorrect. The 9/11 Truth Movement was started by the family members and is made up of millions of concerned citizens.

Really? MILLIONS? Where? What statistic is she using? How come barely 10 people show up to every troof event?

We do not believe that no planes hit the buildings. Our evidence concerns controlled demolition and thermite.

Thermite can't bring down a building. Thermite isn't used as an explosive in anyway for anything. It's a PRIMER for some underwater explosives, but notice PRIMER for an explosive isn't the same as BEING an explosive.

 
At 20 May, 2010 21:46, Blogger Billman said...

I asked Dan if he had seen the peer reviewed and unchallenged scientific paper concerning the presence of thermite in the dust samples

Is there a paper that meets these criteria that actually exists?

Because "Active Thermitic Material Found In World Trade Center Dust" has never been "peer-reviewed" nor has it gone "unchallenged." Christ, come to this simple blog.

and he said “I don’t want to see it.” I attempted to hand him a copy but he refused to take it.

His choice. If he doesn't want to see it, that's his choice.

I then told the audience that I had plenty of information and DVDs for them. At this point there were a few cries of “sit down” and the Chaplain stood up and said “why don’t you find a nice man, get married and have babies.”

HOW did he say it? It sounds like the kind of cheesy thing a chaplain would say... and probably he was being nice.

I kid you not. I rolled my eyes and sat down.

It was cheesy. Doubt it was meant to be rude in any way.

You could hear a pin drop. More questions from the audience including “are there actually two Seattle’s?”

Every group has one person asking retarded questions. No surprise.

Dan: Any more questions?

Me: How many buildings collapsed on September 11?

Dan: There were 7 buildings in the WTC complex.

Me: Yes, but how many collapsed on September 11?


Seriously, Lady? That is the answer: ALL SEVEN BUIDLINGS either collapsed or had to be demolished. WTC 7 was the first to be rebuilt.

Dan: I’ve answered your question. There were 7 buildings.

Perhaps he coud have been more specific to her, but I got what he was saying.

Me: No, you haven’t answered my question.

He JUST DID.

I asked how many buildings collapsed on September 11. I read an interview where you said that you watched Building 7 collapse.

Dan ignored me and finished his talk with an amusing anecdote.

I was now the most unpopular person in the room.

Which you are sooo proud of, because now it means 911blogger will call you a Heroine.

I proceeded to hand out as much information as I could - and articles about thermite

I SO want to see these articles on thermite. Especially if any of them say a 110 building can be brought down by it.

Most people told me I was rude and that this wasn’t the time and place (not true)

Completely true about the rude part.

and that I had arrived with an agenda (true). I apologised to everyone and tried to charm as many people as possible.

Charm, as in "decieve" so they'll forgive you for being an ass?

Once I apologised, they were stuck

Your "Agenda," again?

- then they had to listen.

No. They probably just didn't want to be rude like you.

I responded to these remarks with the standard replies.

So there IS a troofer handbook!

The Chaplain apologised for his earlier comment but kept saying “you’re a good looking girl, why do you care about this stuff?” We chatted for about ten minutes and he was very open and listened carefully.

See? Nice guy, not meant to offend. And certianly NOT RUDE like a 911blogger commentor called him.

This information was new to him and he seemed genuinely interested. He promised to look at the information (including the thermite paper) and watch the DVDs. We finished with a hug and I ended up really liking him. After most people had left, I approached Dan with the Chaplain.

Me: Can we talk now Dan?

Dan: I’m not talking to you. You’re rude. Don’t you know about the sanctity of the stage (it was actually the floor).


So.. the answer is NO, you DON'T know about the sanctity of the stage. It doesn't matter if it was an actual FLOOR, still, it was HIS and you rudely interrupted him.

 
At 20 May, 2010 21:51, Blogger Billman said...

Me: I apologise Dan. I asked a simple question about the victims’ family members demanding a new investigation.

Just asking questions, right?

I’m sorry if it upset you so much. I apologise.

Dan: I don’t care. I’m not talking to you.


Now that's being silly on his part if that happened.

Chaplain: She’s apologised Dan. You should talk to her. She seems like a sincere and good person.

Not to me. With her 'charm' and 'agendas' and making people 'stuck' listening to her.

Dan bolted out the back door as the Chaplain stood there stunned. I told the Chaplain that “the reason he won’t talk to me is because he knows I’m right.”

No, probably because he's barely controlling his anger. He must get frustrated at having to deal with this situation repeatedly. He's not handling it well.

These people were not the usual crowd I would try and enlighten about 9/11 Truth.

Yet you made an ass out of yourself and were rude anyway.

I must have said “victims’ family members” about 100 times.

Yes, Jon Gold uses this tactic, which Arhoolie himself calls "petty."

I knew it would be difficult doing this on my own as it is always good to have backup and I felt guilty for upsetting people.

But not guilty enough to NOT write a blog about how proud you were to have done it and then get labeled a Heroine for it, right?

 
At 20 May, 2010 21:55, Blogger Billman said...

Wow, here's the best comment on 911blogger:

When the priest told her to get married and have babies, maybe she should have said, "and yes, I will make sure not to bring them into a Catholic Church where they may run the risk of being molested by a pedophile priest". To the fire fighter, she could have said, you are a brave man but your ignorance about what really happened at ground zero is an insult to your fallen comrades. Ignorance can be found everywhere, even among the brave and the devout.

And this is an honorable reply, right, troofers? Something appropriate for the venue?

 
At 21 May, 2010 09:41, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Any chance you can find some news on your own instead of cut n pasting stuff from 9/11 blogger, adding your own opinion, and calling it your own blog?

Heck, why not rename it to Anti-9/11 Blogger.

 
At 21 May, 2010 10:47, Blogger GuitarBill said...

Anonymous whines, "...Any chance you can find some news on your own instead of cut n pasting stuff from 9/11 blogger, adding your own opinion, and calling it your own blog?"

That's rich, shit-for-brains. And especially so when one considers that you parrot Box Boy ad nauseum and then try to pass Box Boy's lunacy off as "independent thinking".

Do you blush when you lie like a rug, Anonymous?

And remember, I'm just askin' questions...

 
At 22 May, 2010 11:43, Anonymous Anonymous said...

That's rich, shit-for-brains. And especially so when one considers that you parrot Box Boy ad nauseum and then try to pass Box Boy's lunacy off as "independent thinking".

Tu quoque fallacy.

Sincerely yours, the other anonymous guy™.

Remember, I'm just providing answers to Sideshow Bill's braindead questions.

 
At 22 May, 2010 13:56, Blogger GuitarBill said...

Anonymous prevaricates, "...Tu quoque fallacy."

Wrong shit-for-brains.

Wikipedia wrote, "...Not all uses of tu quoque arguments involve logical fallacy. One convenient and not fallacious way [to use tu quoque] is by pointing out the similarities between the activity of the criticizer and the activity about which he is being questioned."

Source: Wikipedia: Tu Quoque--Legitimate use.

Next time, shit-for-brains, leave the philosophy to those of us who have a real education.

"...Sincerely yours, the other anonymous guy™."

Yeah, that pile of manure carries a lot of weight around here, shit-for-brains. After all, you're a quote miner and compulsive liar who misrepresents his sources. Thus, any claims you make are dead on arrival.

Any more horseshit for us, shit-for-brains?

And remember, lunatic, I'm just askin' questions...

 
At 22 May, 2010 15:05, Anonymous Anonymous said...

This guitarBill sure is a fucking genius. Is there anything he cant do? He even "lives" with his wife and lovely daughters.

 
At 22 May, 2010 15:22, Blogger GuitarBill said...

Anonymous whines, "...This guitarBill sure is a fucking genius. Is there anything he cant do? He even "lives" with his wife and lovely daughters."

Would you prefer "resides", shit-for-brains?

And remember, I'm just askin' questions...

 
At 22 May, 2010 16:30, Blogger Triterope said...

Heck, why not rename it to Anti-9/11 Blogger.

As opposed to Screw Loose Change?

 
At 22 May, 2010 19:45, Blogger Billman said...

I still like "Fire Can't Melt Stupid" for a blog name.

 
At 23 May, 2010 09:14, Blogger Boris Epstein said...

Well, I think Ms Breeze was wrong in juxtaposing Mr Daly's heroism vs that of those who seek the truth about 9/11. He was there, he did his duty and I salute him for that.

However, being a firefighter or even a heroic one, or even one on the scene on 9/11 does not give one an automatic status of a phophet whose word needs to be taken unquestionably. And Mr Daly absolutely totally and utterly fails to make a case for his points.

And Ms Breeze did a good job of exposing debunkers for what they are. The audience's behaviour was very much like that of the debunkers on this blog who, being utterly short on logic and factual argument (there usual state) rely more on ad hominem attacks of various kinds.

 
At 23 May, 2010 14:00, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"However, being a firefighter or even a heroic one, or even one on the scene on 9/11 does not give one an automatic status of a phophet whose word needs to be taken unquestionably."

An eye-witness is not a "phophet"[sic], bore-ass. But I'd take his word over your insane, mindless ramblings any day of the week.

"The audience's behaviour was very much like that of the debunkers on this blog who, being utterly short on logic and factual argument (there usual state) rely more on ad hominem attacks of various kinds."

You're a retarded marmoset, bore-ass, and no one takes you seriously.

 
At 23 May, 2010 19:23, Blogger Billman said...

I got bored and watched Jason Bermas and Dylan Avery vs. Popular Mechanics, and could not believe how rude Jason Bermas was.

Boris, it seems the 9/11 truthers are far worse at any ad hominem stuff than anyone here has ever been. We do it for shits and giggles and to troll. Troofers do it because they honestly want to personally attack people.

Not all of them, I'll grant you that. There's an Anonymous who comes on here that can actually have a cordial debate, and I respect whoever it is, but for the most part, and I know you're blind to it, troofers have said way worse than anything a debunker has.

And its all semantics really. Just words. I know we all want to attack each other's character on a daily basis, because 9/11 truth has gotten stale on both ends, but its getting old.

I like Pat and James posts. They keep me updated on 9/11 truth from a non-troofer point of view. But troofers would prefere there were no non-troofer point of views, while at the same time declaring the rights to free speech to be in danger, yet troofer sites are the most heavily moderated and edited I've ever seen, and don't dare have a differing veiw point. Is there any 9/11 troof site that allows any debunker on to it?

Yet this blog allows anyone to post, even and especially troofers, and you just don't get how rare that is. Pat and James have pretty decent characters to allow that, don't you think?

 
At 24 May, 2010 05:07, Blogger Triterope said...

The audience's behaviour was very much like that of the debunkers on this blog who, being utterly short on logic and factual argument (there usual state) rely more on ad hominem attacks of various kinds.

So event organizers are supposed to be polite to people who are only there to hijack the event to their own purposes?

Tell ya what, Boris: next time someone in your area is giving a speech about their knowledge or personal experience, attend it, demand the floor, and tell them everything they said is bullshit because of some things you read on the Internet. See what kind of reaction you get.

Interrupting a speech at a church with 9-11 Truth bullshit was very rude, and the reaction she got was a normal human reaction. If you were human, you'd know that.

Now I know what you're thinking: DURR YOU PROVE MY POINT ABOUT AD HOMINEMS DURRRRRRRRRRRR. Well, maybe I did. But do you know why people like me are long on mockery and short on factual argument? Because factual arguments don't work on you people.

Very knowledgeable people, especially at the JREF 9-11 conspiracy forum, have written pages and pages and pages and pages about why all your 9-11 Truth shit is wrong. And people like you just keep coming back and making the same claims over and over and over and over, as though the issue were brand new. Polite logical debate is pearls, and you are swine.

Side note: my word verification is "ruskie." Heh.

 
At 24 May, 2010 08:35, Blogger Billman said...

Triterope, very very well spoken. But sadly, Boris may not understand it.

 
At 25 May, 2010 14:51, Anonymous James R said...

I`m out of the closet, so if any of you want to hook up at TAM 8 in Las Vegas give me a call.

 
At 25 May, 2010 15:42, Anonymous Every troofer there is said...

I have no life, so if you could pay my gas bill so I can end my meaningless life in a painless manner, I'd appreciate it.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home