Monday, May 31, 2010

Confirmation? We Don't Need No Stinking Confirmation!

Waterboy Kevin Ryan posts the good news that somebody else wants to test the dust samples to confirm or refute the possibility that they contain traces of thermite. The bad news? The Troofers don't want to cooperate.

I wrote back to the sampler and suggested to him that Corley could probably obtain his own WTC dust samples. After all, Corley had supposedly waded through WTC dust for months. Why was he asking for our samples?


The rest of the article is revealing for its paranoia. I laughed a couple of months ago when I noted that the French scientist who supposedly confirmed the thermite results turned out to: a) not have confirmed the results and b) opined that perhaps his samples were "deactivated". Turns out Ryan is just as suspicious:

Immediately after the article was published, it appeared that a response might be forthcoming due to inexplicable damage to several packages sent, via the US Postal Service, between some of the investigators who were involved. When my colleague Steven Jones sent a sample of the red-gray chips to my post office box in late April 2009, the samples had been removed from the double envelope package through a series of slits just barely big enough to slide the small vial out. The postal inspector never responded to my complaint. But when I later mailed something to my colleague James Gourley, the envelope arrived with a corner ripped out, in a gross kind of damage that neither of us had ever seen.


Professor Jones chimes in in the comments:

Excellent sleuthing work, Kevin --

as usual. I deeply appreciate your insights through the years.

You have identified one of the main insiders, IMO.


So in other words, they are not going to allow independent confirmation of their results. This is not the scientific method as I understand it.

We'll see if this flies with the "responsible wing" of the Truth Movement.

Labels: ,

66 Comments:

At 01 June, 2010 00:01, Anonymous paul w said...

Pat, they WILL allow independent confirmation of their results...when it confirms with their results.

Anything other than a full and public agreement with the truther findings is obviously a black op/psyche op/ah, you know the rest.

Scientific method?
Truthers?
Nah, they've never met.

 
At 01 June, 2010 00:37, Blogger Billman said...

Well put, Paul.

 
At 01 June, 2010 04:57, Blogger BG said...

As usual, SLC Blog has the logic of this turned on its head.

The official national, state, and local governing bodies, and FEMA, and NIST, along with the FBI, have the responsibility to handle a reasonable investigation of issues related to events on 9/11/2001. Additionally, entities involved in litigation such as Deuthsche Bank have contracted for scientific analysis. As a follow on, a functioning Court system would provide follow through.

Discussing the idea that individuals such as Ryan or Jones are (or are not) cooperating with official bodies is simply deflecting the blame from the heinous cover-up by the responsible bodies.

 
At 01 June, 2010 06:44, Anonymous Anonymous said...

So in other words, they are not going to allow independent confirmation of their results. This is not the scientific method as I understand it.

Wrong. As usual you ommit the following in your poor attack:

"The independent analyst he found worked for Gene Corley’s company, CTL Group. Gene Corley is the Senior Vice President of CTL Group,[xxii] and the new independent analyst, Don Broton, works for Gene Corley."

That by far is NOT independent. Try again though.

I would suggest the leading scientists of 9/11 Truth and Corley, Gross, etc. et al. get together and work together on the tests.

 
At 01 June, 2010 07:37, Blogger James B. said...

My favorite comment is this guy"

Also, the 12th Aviation Battallion, which had numerous helicopters available, was based at Fort Belvoir, but its members were far away from there, undertaking weapons training, at the time of the 9/11 attacks. This would have meant they were unable to help defend the airspace over Washington and the Pentagon.


Sorry, that only works in Command and Conquer.

 
At 01 June, 2010 07:59, Blogger Billman said...

As usual, a troofer comes here to say "as usual the slc dumb dumb dummy dumbunker cultists get it wrong" without explaining exactly what has been "gotten wrong", and then they segue into an off topic rant about NIST.

I could write a choose your own adventure book, about someone trying to argue with a troofer, based soley on these comments threads, they've become so trite and predictable.

Hey, is this the part where one of you say how my logic is flawed, and then you cut and paste a lengthy thing about WTC 7 and freefall?

Or mention the family members, first responders, like they all support your ad-hom efforts?

 
At 01 June, 2010 08:11, Anonymous sackcloth and ashes said...

'I would suggest the leading scientists of 9/11 Truth and Corley, Gross, etc. et al. get together and work together on the tests.'

Oh, right, and how's that going to work? The real scientists are going to go through the samples, recognise Harrit and Jones distorted the results, and then the troofers can claim that the former are part of the cover-up.

Look, it's simple. Just repeat these sentences to yourself:

(1) Al Qaeda did 9/11.
(2) There was no CD.
(3) There was no inside job.

There. Now you can actually go and get yourself a life.

 
At 01 June, 2010 10:10, Blogger Bill said...

pretty cute how they want anyone who wants to corroborate their findings to get samples from USGS. that way they have a trap door to jump through when they find nothing.

"thays removed that there nano termites!"

 
At 01 June, 2010 10:10, Blogger Bill said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 01 June, 2010 10:40, Blogger avicenne said...

"the envelope arrived with a corner ripped out, in a gross kind of damage that neither of us had ever seen."

We're in Three Days of the Condor territory now. That scene where the assassin poses as a postal worker and wipes out an entire CIA unit. Thankfully, Robert Redford was out to lunch at the time, not unlike the paranoid nuts who think their red-grey chips have been tampered with, like anyone gives a shit.

 
At 01 June, 2010 12:51, Blogger Billman said...

Well, I'm still trying to find when Henry-Couannier somehow debunked the paper like that caller on Rob Breakenridge show said, and all I get, thanks to google abuse, is troofer sites when I search for it.

 
At 01 June, 2010 15:23, Anonymous Anonymous #2 said...

Couannier couldn't get his samples to ignite, which is key. His other observations matched Jones et al., but not this key point.

 
At 01 June, 2010 15:35, Anonymous Dylan Unsavery said...

Waterboy Ryan did not bother to comment on this point made by the journalist:

"He said man made nano-thermite would have a very distinct pattern would likely be revealed by x-ray defraction(sic) which I told him I gather you understood as you had sent some dust to another lab for the test.”

Well Waterboy, where are your x-ray diffraction results?

 
At 01 June, 2010 16:03, Blogger Triterope said...

What's interesting about the 911blogger post is that they don't seem to realize that the criticism of Bentham Open Journals was highly valid.

The people over at JREF 9-11 Conspiracy forum discovered that their peer-reviewed paper actually went through no peer review whatsoever.

Rather than address that rather damning flaw, they go on the offensive against "email and blog attacks" and "those who created the official reports" and "corporate funded politicians" and whatever other bogeymen they can think up.

This helped me understand why Truthers react so angrily to both mockery and criticism; they don't know the difference.

 
At 01 June, 2010 19:50, Anonymous paul w said...

"the envelope arrived with a corner ripped out, in a gross kind of damage that neither of us had ever seen."

Yeah, I laughed at that one, too.

Then again, about twenty years ago my mother baked me a full-plate apple pie, put the thing into a jiffy bag, and posted it...

I was living in Sydney, she in Adelaide (1,500km apart).

Yes, it arrived at our office the very next day, at lunchtime, when we were deciding where to go and have lunch...in perfect condition.

A damaged letter...yeah, gotta be tampering by the NWO!

 
At 01 June, 2010 20:17, Blogger ConsDemo said...

Another twoofer criminal faces justice.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/SHOWBIZ/celebrity.news.gossip/06/01/charlie.sheen.jail.time.ppl/index.html?iref=allsearch

BG said

The official national, state, and local governing bodies, and FEMA, and NIST, along with the FBI, have the responsibility to handle a reasonable investigation of issues related to events on 9/11/2001.

They did, so what is your problem, dumbshit?

 
At 01 June, 2010 22:31, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You're so right ComsDemoIdiot

Thanks to all the official investigations of which we have NO reason whatsoever to question anything they said. We now know exactly what happened to those buildings. Just ask Lee Hamilton:

What caused the collapse of the buildings, to summarize it, was that the super-heated jet fuel melted the steel super-structure of these buildings and caused their collapse.
--- Lee Hamilton, Co-Chair of the 9/11 Commission, in an interview with Evan Soloman, CBC News (Canadian Broadcasting), August 21, 2006

 
At 01 June, 2010 23:24, Blogger GuitarBill said...

Anonymous whines, "...Thanks to all the official investigations of which we have NO reason whatsoever to question anything they said."

Since when are your questions equivalent to evidence, jizzmop?

And remember, douche-nozzle, I'm just askin' questions...

 
At 02 June, 2010 04:41, Blogger ConsDemo said...

Thanks to all the official investigations of which we have NO reason whatsoever to question anything they said.

Sorry moron, but your ideological reasons for wanting to believe this country attacked itself on 9/11 are not sufficient justifications for wasting other people's time and taxpayer money on a new investigation.

 
At 02 June, 2010 06:34, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"What caused the collapse of the buildings, to summarize it, was that the super-heated jet fuel melted the steel super-structure of these buildings and caused their collapse.
--- Lee Hamilton, Co-Chair of the 9/11 Commission, in an interview with Evan Soloman, CBC News (Canadian Broadcasting), August 21, 2006"

Wow, that's Joe Biden level stupidity right there. Hell, that's twoooofer™ level idiotic.

What do you call "super-heated jet fuel"

Fire.

 
At 02 June, 2010 10:50, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

Sackmuffin in Ashes is coming along quite nicely on bass! Now,he's moved onto claiming that Jones and Harritt have "distorted" the results of the dust sample tests! That's a little different than his infamous and doofy "fabricated" assertion from before,but still truly paranoid and insane.There's nothing so stimulating as the newest dumbass conspiracy theory from the addled Debunker Cult! As usual for Professor Archie Snide from Blighty,it's a conspiracy by little old activists in NYC to frame the CIA et al. for the demolitions at the Trade Center.Sackdoily,you're a million laughs!!!!

 
At 02 June, 2010 11:13, Anonymous Anonymous said...

pretty cute how they want anyone who wants to corroborate their findings to get samples from USGS. that way they have a trap door to jump through when they find nothing.

That sample has the iron microspheres too. So they will find the same thing rest assured if, which they won't, ever test for the material.

Microspheres of iron, had to have reached 2750 degrees. Perfectly oxygenated carbon fire at its very zenith, can perhaps reach 1800 degrees.

I wonder what accounts for such a drastic increase in temperatures?

Perhaps the same thing that caused molten steel and iron to melt, eh?

Come on now, debunker boyz, surely you have a conspiracy theory for this excuse?

 
At 02 June, 2010 11:19, Anonymous Anonymous said...

SConsdemoorry moron, but your ideological reasons for wanting to believe this country attacked itself on 9/11 are not sufficient justifications for wasting other people's time and taxpayer money on a new investigation.

Yeah cuze even the post office was in on it right? Its called indviduals within the government who did 9/11, not the whole country. What a nimwhit!!

Now debunkers are pushing a conspiracy theory that involves the whole country!

Amazing!!

 
At 02 June, 2010 11:21, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What caused the collapse of the buildings, to summarize it, was that the super-heated jet fuel melted the steel super-structure of these buildings and caused their collapse.--- Lee Hamilton, Co-Chair of the 9/11 Commission, in an interview with Evan Soloman, CBC News (Canadian Broadcasting), August 21, 2006"

Hell debunkers, even Hamilton of the infamous 9/11 Commission states the steel was melted!

Debunkers-"No steel was melted." Wash, repeat, lie again.

 
At 02 June, 2010 12:45, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Hell debunkers, even Hamilton of the infamous 9/11 Commission states the steel was melted!"

Yeah, but he's a Democrat.

Like I just said, Joe Biden level stooooopidity.

 
At 02 June, 2010 16:08, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

Isn't the Debunker Cult so cute?! Their babbling non-response on the microspheres is reminiscent of the bums they arrest on "Cops".So how did those microspheres develop anyway,Boyos? Where's Shyte when you need him? JJB? Paddy? And where the fuck is that troglodyte RonaldWeak? Yea,we know you're taking a beating here at Jerkoff Land,but don't you have the balls to Step up Tiger?

 
At 02 June, 2010 16:14, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"the Debunker Cult"

Blather.

Rinse.

Repeat.

The rest of his bullshit makes no sense at all.

Poor, pitiful mook.

 
At 02 June, 2010 16:43, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

To paraphrase Woody Allen,"one more in a series of non responses from the loopy Debunker Cult".It's always PornBoy at the head of the shrieking lunatic pack,leaping forward with completely insane assertions and unable to muster simple responses to simple questions.Same old thing.

 
At 02 June, 2010 17:27, Blogger Archibald said...

Oh God. THIS again? YOU DON'T NEED TO MELT STEEL TO WEAKEN IT! Seriously. I think I have completely run out of patience talking to these people. It's like arguing religion with them because that is what it has become to them.
I love when Korey "The Deserter" Rowe called the Opie and Anthony show and told an NYPD officer who was there that he didn't see what he saw. The cop repeatedly told him "Wrong, stupid. I was there. I know what I saw." The real gem was when Jim Norton tore into him, calling the troof movement "fake rebellion" and compared it to rebelling against mom and dad.

 
At 02 June, 2010 17:57, Blogger ConsDemo said...

Yeah cuze even the post office was in on it right? Its called indviduals within the government who did 9/11, not the whole country

Oh, here we go again, the stupid five people did it, crap. Sorry, asswipe, you are accusing the country of staging an attack on itself. A broad swath of the population would have had to have been explicitly or implicitly complicit in the your crackpot "inside job" if was true. Democratically elected officials, the military, firefighters, journalists, investigators, airline pilots, flight attendants, airline ticket service folks, the list goes on on on.

Hatred for this country and everything about it is what motives you and the other turds that make of the 9/11 twoof movement.

 
At 02 June, 2010 20:15, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh God. THIS again? YOU DON'T NEED TO MELT STEEL TO WEAKEN IT! Seriously.

Lets put aside the issue of the fact that steel (or at least Iron wich has a slightly higher melting pooint that steel)did in fact melt even though the fires by themselves could not come within 1000F of that.....let's put that aside for now. Even if we accept your argument that it only had to weaken the steel yadda yadda yadda, it not matter because the structure could handle many times their required loads:

"…live loads on these columns can be increased more than 2,000 percent before failure occurs. …the WTC towers will have an inherent capacity to resist unforeseen calamities. This capacity stems from its Vierendeel wall system and is enhanced through the use of high-strength steels."
--- "How Columns Will Be Designed for 110-Story Buildings," Engineering News-Record 2 April 1964: 48-49.

the steel beams exceeded requirements to bear 36,000 pounds per square inch. Often they were capable of bearing around 42,000 pounds per square inch. "
--- Steel Not Seen As Factor in WTC Collapse, By DEVLIN BARRETT, The Associated Press, August 27, 2003

 
At 02 June, 2010 20:26, Anonymous Anonymous said...

...and the North Tower already had a huge fire in 1975 on six lower floors (9th to 14th) which needless to say, with the sheer weight of the upper 96 floors bearing down upon the fire zone, the steel did not even weaken. How do you schmuckheads explain away that one?

From the New York Times, February 14, 1975:

A three-alarm fire broke out in the 11th-floor offices of the B. F. Goodrich Company in the north tower of the World Trade Center just before midnight last night and spread through an inner-service core to the ninth and 14th floors. “It was like fighting a blow torch,” according to Capt. Harold Kull of Engine Co. 6, who said all of his men “got their necks and cars burned” trying to get into the 11th Floor hall from a stairwell. A total of 24 pieces of fire fighting apparatus and 132 firemen fought the fire. Sixteen firemen were treated at the scene for smoke inhalation. Flames could be seen pouring out of the 11th-floor windows on the east side of the building.
--- TRADE CENTER HIT BY SIX-FLOOR FIRE, Men Are Injured, The New York Times, February 14, 1975.

 
At 02 June, 2010 20:29, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Debunker Cult"

Lather.

Rinse.

Repeat.

Talk to the voices in you head.

 
At 02 June, 2010 20:31, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Even Edgar and Musso (they are on your side...claim no explosives were used) shoot to hell your "only needed to weaken it" nonsense:

"It is known that structural steel begins to soften around 425 °C and loses about half of its strength at 650 °C. …But even a 50% loss of strength is still insufficient, by itself, to explain the WTC collapse... The WTC, on this low-wind day, was likely not stressed more than a third of the design allowable... Even with its strength halved, the steel could still support two to three times the stresses imposed by a 650 °C fire."
--- Thomas Eagar and Christopher Musso, "Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? Science, Engineering, and Speculation," JOM: Journal of the Minerals, Metals & Materials Society 53.12 (2001), 8–11 (www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM /0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html).

 
At 02 June, 2010 20:36, Anonymous Anonymous said...

And you cannot blame the steel:

The global analyses with structural impact damage showed that both towers had considerable reserve capacity”
--- S. Sunder, W. Grosshandler, H. S. Lew, et al. “Final report on the collapse of the World Trade Center towers, NIST NCSTAR. Gaithersburg”, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology, September 2005.

"The results established that this type of assembly was capable of sustaining a large gravity load, without collapsing, for a substantial period of time relative to the duration of the fires in any given location on September 11th."
--- NIST, Final Report of the National Construction Safety Team on the Collapses of the World Trade Center Towers (Draft). (www.nist.gov/pubs/NISTNCSTARldraft.pdf) 195.

"Early tests on steel beams from the World Trade Center show they generally met or were stronger than design requirements, ruling them out as a contributing cause of the collapse of the towers..."
--- Steel Not Seen As Factor in WTC Collapse, By DEVLIN BARRETT, The Associated Press, August 27, 2003

"…because the number of columns lost on the initial impact was not large and the loads were shifted to remaining columns in this highly redundant structure."
---Thomas Eagar, a professor of materials engineering at MIT who supports the official view of the collapses, 2001.

“The floor framing system for the two towers was complex and substantially more redundant than typical bar joist floor systems.”
--- Report #403, World Trade Center Building Performance Study, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), May 1, 2002, www.fema

 
At 02 June, 2010 20:42, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

" Anonymous said...
Even Edgar and Musso (they are on your side...claim no explosives were used) shoot to hell your "only needed to weaken it" nonsense:"

Oh shut up, you ignorant mook.

Explain this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherman%27s_neckties



"Anonymous said...
And you cannot blame the steel:

The global analyses with structural impact damage showed that both towers had considerable reserve capacity”"

Explain away why the buildings collapsed because they here hit by huge airliners traveling at high speed and each strike released the energy equivelent of a small nuclear device. And then the raging fires that burned uncontroled and uncontrolable.

Fucking moron.

 
At 02 June, 2010 20:45, Anonymous Anonymous said...

LLong writes:
What do you call "super-heated jet fuel(?)"

Not a factor. The Jet Fuel burned off in a few minutes after which it was not there anymore to heat up the steal to "weaken" it:

"The jet fuel probably burned out in less than 10 minutes."
---Shyam Sunder, lead investigator for NIST, Andy Field, "A Look Inside a Radical New Theory of the WTC Collapse," Fire/Rescue News 7 February 2004 (available at
cms.firehouse.com/content/article/article.jsp?sectionId=46&id=25807).

"initial jet fuel fires themselves lasted at most a few minutes"
---NIST final report (179)

 
At 02 June, 2010 20:50, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What do you call "super-heated jet fuel"

Also, according to Wikipeadia:

The most commonly used fuels for commercial aviation are Jet A and Jet A-1... Kerosene-type jet fuel (including Jet A and Jet A-1) has an open air burning temperatures of287.5 °C (549.5 °F)

So much for your "super-heated jet fuel"....if by superheated you mean a whopping 549.5°F

Pop goes your argument!

 
At 02 June, 2010 21:03, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Explain away why the buildings collapsed because they here hit by huge airliners traveling at high speed and each strike released the energy equivelent of a small nuclear device. And then the raging fires that burned uncontroled and uncontrolable.

OK, except that argument will not work for Building 7 because there was no plane and no jet fuel.

Pop goes your argument once again.

 
At 02 June, 2010 21:04, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Not a factor. The Jet Fuel burned off in a few minutes"

So what?

You had raging fires that lasted until the buildings collapsed.


" Anonymous said...
What do you call "super-heated jet fuel""

I answered that earlier, brian, you retarded marmoset.

It's called "Fire".

Look, moron, you lost this argument the last time you tried to use it, give it up and just go a way again.

 
At 02 June, 2010 21:06, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"OK, except that argument will not work for Building 7 because there was no plane and no jet fuel."

Except for the innumerable pieces of the tower that fell on in from the collapse, and the raging fires that lasted for hours nad hours and the fact that the FDNY knew the fucking thing was going to collapse,

So take your "Pop goes your argument once again", fold it until it's all cornners and shove it up your ass, brian, you pathetic loser.

 
At 02 June, 2010 21:15, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Explain away why the buildings collapsed because they here hit by huge airliners traveling at high speed and each strike released the energy equivelent of a small nuclear device. And then the raging fires that burned uncontroled and uncontrolable.

I'll ignore the extraordianrily dumb comment about "released the energy equivelent of a small nuclear device." NIST makes no absurd claim such as this.

regarding "buildings collapsed because they here hit by huge airliners traveling at high speed"

“The WTC towers had been designed to withstand the accidental impact of a Boeing 707 seeking to land at a nearby airport…”
--- Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), World Trade Center building performance study: Preliminary observations, and recommendations, Report FEMA 403. Washington, D.C.: Federal Emergency Management Agency, May 2002.

 
At 02 June, 2010 21:17, Anonymous Anonymous said...

regarding "buildings collapsed because they here hit by huge airliners traveling at high speed"

more examples:

“The 110-story towers of the World Trade Center were designed to withstand as a whole the forces caused by a horizontal impact of a large commercial aircraft.”
--- Z. P. Bazant and Y. Zhou, “Why did the World Trade Center collapse? Simple analysis”, J. Eng. Mech., vol. 128, pp. 2-6, January 2002.

"The buildings have been investigated and found to be safe in an assumed collision with a large jet airliner (Boeing 707 – DC 8) traveling at 600 miles per hour. Analysis indicates that such collision would result in only local damage which could not cause collapse or substantial damage to the building...
---John Skilling, chief structural engineer for the World Trade Center, Eric Nalder, “Twin Towers Engineered To Withstand Jet Collision,” Seattle Times, February 27, 1993,

 
At 02 June, 2010 21:19, Anonymous Anonymous said...

regarding "buildings collapsed because they here hit by huge airliners traveling at high speed"

more examples:

The building was designed to have a fully loaded 707 crash into it, that was the largest plane at the time. I believe that the building could probably sustain multiple impacts of jet liners because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen door—this intense grid—and the plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting. It really does nothing to the screen netting.
--- Frank De Martini, who had been the on-site construction manager for the World Trade Center, quoted in a pre-9/11 documentary, World Trade Center: A Modern Marvel

 
At 02 June, 2010 21:25, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I found yet another quote as it realates to the reserve capacity of the load bearing structure further undermining your, the steel only had the "weaken" argument.

“The core columns were designed to carry the building gravity loads and were loaded to approximately 50% of their capacity before the aircraft impact.... the exterior columns were loaded to only approximately 20% of their capacity before the aircraft impact”
--- S. W. Banovic, T. Foecke, W.E. Luecke, et al. “The role of metallurgy in the NIST investigation of the World Trade Center towers collapse”,JOM, vol. 59, no. 11, pp. 22-29, November 2007.

 
At 02 June, 2010 21:40, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Except for the innumerable pieces of the tower that fell on in from the collapse, and the raging fires that lasted for hours nad hours

The final NIST report says that the structural damage to the south face was not a factor:

NIST says, "Other than initiating the fires in WTC7, the damage from the debris from WTC 1 had little effect on initiating the collapse of WTC7."

So, since there was no plane, and NIST says neither the structural damage or the desiel fuel played a significant role, they are claming that fire alone brought "7" down.

Except:

…experts said no building like it, a modern, steel-reinforced high-rise, had ever collapsed because of an uncontrolled fire, and engineers have been trying to figure out exactly what happened.
--- “Engineers Suspect Diesel Fuel in Collapse of 7 World Trade Center,” by JAMES GLANZ, The New York Times, November 29, 2001

 
At 02 June, 2010 21:42, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mr. Long,

I gotta go to sleep.

Regarding all your insults, I just got two words for you:

YOUR MOTHER!

LOL

 
At 03 June, 2010 04:00, Anonymous sackcloth and ashes said...

'Sackdoily,you're a million laughs!!!!'

Well, I'm glad I make you giggle, Walt. Just so we're even, I thought I'd let you know that I found your account of your 'life' in the UK - as per these threads - to be comedy gold:

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=27396589&postID=5971462750759912988&page=1&token=1274392183760_AIe9_BHiNymD3_kblnhC8Xiv9cr_F44oGU6jw2YvL45khEyc_0aCyPydfKlqm5hDZy3t3g7Aywkvz8tlG4N9CvxiVUiIXJ75TOK38W4tmXNtjSl8tLyantvrVLqs7o7V_fMe79zN5kl6QQskMgqS73nld79GOeCqUvuQHvYmB8V3p_zUqHXcAOpfdtVvlj4HLrcU2yaUMf4CVgFVW626yHErXrdxVeTGBz6Jy-T18-2IvqTJlFcAhlgoP9Os63z_LvF8g9vC6xXA

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=27396589&postID=9204561461398429606

So let's get this straight. Arseholie claimed he lived for three years in the UK, but can only describe being 'in Southport and West London and SE London (New Cross)' in 1995. The move from Merseyside to the capital is unexplained. No reference to a job, or to any other particular reason for this move (or even ending up in Southport in the first place). But he does tell us that he fathered a child there, and that if I ask nicely he'll send me 'photos of me and my baby son in Southport circa 1995'. More on that later.

Walt's time in the outskirts of Liverpool did not prevent him from using the words 'English and Liverpudlians' in the same sentence (this was on an earlier thread a couple of months back). Never mind the fact that the two are one and the same, or that the phrase 'Liverpudlian' went out of fashion at about the time the Beatles split. We call them 'scousers', Walt. Remember that the next time you try and spin one of your yarns.

Moving now to his stay in New Cross, South-East London. Walt tells us that he had a girlfriend who was 'a student at the Laban Institute for Dance' (good online find BTW - did you google 'Dance Schools in South London'?). Whether she was the mother of his baby boy in this particular version of his past remains to be confirmed. In any case, those interested in child-rearing will be interested to note that Walt was able to spend his days 'drinking and fucking and going to movies', and his nights bigging it up in the West End (more on that in due course). Assuming that Mrs Arseholie didn't have to give up her ambitions to be a dancer, who looked after Walt's baby? Was it the 'sister-in-law and her hash smokin' boyfriend'? The troofers amongst us who obsess about Troy Sexton's parenting skills might want to know more.

 
At 03 June, 2010 04:01, Anonymous sackcloth and ashes said...

Then there's the small manner of how Walt was able to live the life of Riley. Again, we have no reference to a job, but somehow Walt's able to take himself off clubbing into 'West London' on a regular basis. Now we do have a welfare system, and the unemployed do get dole money, but it's not enough to pay for a life of larging it up. The fact that Walt didn't even pay a penny of tax while he was in the country also stretches credibility. Knowing the Inland Revenue, there is no way that's possible, unless he did what other illegal immigrants do, which is take on a shitty low-paid job for long hours.

Then there's the prize, which is Walt's inability to remember a single detail about the inner city suburb of London where he lived. Being brought up in SE London, I know New Cross pretty well, and if there's one landmark that nobody passing through it can miss, it's 'The Venue'. OK, it's a bit of a dive, but it's right smack bang in the middle of the High Street, and has got a great big fuck-off sign on the side of it that even Stevie Wonder could see. But Walt couldn't even remember anything at all about this part of town (even when I asked him about this nightclub, and about other features of this 'burb), despite it apparently being a formative part of his life.

This is what happens when you try to cherry-pick stuff you pick up on the internet and try and concoct a story out of it. Ironically enough, Arseholie's efforts to create a fictional past in my country are done in much the same manner as the average troofer concocts his 'theories' about 9/11 - namely, they're done with superficial research, no background knowledge, and a complete ignorance of the subject matter.

I don't know what Walt's efforts to invent his past actually says for himself. I don't know why it was he had to spin a yarn about a non-existent baby boy, a non-existent dancer girlfriend, and a non-existent time spent living the lifestyle one only sees in an 'Austin Powers' film. I can only conclude that this site is like a form of therapy for this deeply disturbed and tragic soul, and it is a way of seeking fulfilment in what would otherwise be an empty and wasted life. But then if there is a moral for Walt - and any like-minded fuckups - it's that if you try and make shit up, you'll always be found out. Just ask 'A Real Veteran'.

Oh, and BTW Walt, punk rock was out of fashion by the mid-1990s. In fact, it was out of fashion in the mid-1980s. You need to do your homework correctly the next time you start reinventing your past online.

 
At 03 June, 2010 04:37, Anonymous Anonymous #2 said...

All that effort, all that typing, and you still didn't achieve your "gotcha" moment. Just some paranoid, conspiratorial innuendo and insinuation, tenuous accusations and pithy straw grasping desperation.

You ain't Herbert Hoover and you ain't got no file on Arhoolie, and that pisses you off. All you have is your hilarious obsession with a little time Arhoolie spent in your shithole country.

I mean: what kind of creepy, possessed wannabe Humphrey Schmogart are you anyway?

Punk rock out of fashion in the nineties? And that's a fuckin argument? I can still visit punk rock concerts if I want to, because there's still a scene.

Like all other debunktard stalker creeps though, your ultimate goal is infogathering by baiting.

You want to bait Arhoolie into sending you pictures or any form of personal info, so you can use that in one of your sick, demented anti-activist hate campaigns.

Don't fall for it Arhoolie, that punk rock comment alone shows you what kind of unworldly, dateless, anally retentive hermit you're dealing with. I say just leave the mentally ill nerd and his obsession be.

 
At 03 June, 2010 06:21, Anonymous sackcloth and ashes said...

'Just some paranoid, conspiratorial innuendo and insinuation, tenuous accusations and pithy straw grasping desperation.'

That describes 9/11 Troof nicely. Thank you very much. I'll remember that quote.

Anyway, you might not find Arseholie's fantasies amusing, but I do. I'm just not surprised that your pitiful little 'movement' of kooks, social failures and KKK-types can only attract clowns like him to your cause.

Welcome to Failure. Population - you, and a couple of other fuckups.

 
At 03 June, 2010 06:39, Anonymous Anonymous #2 said...

"That describes 9/11 Troof nicely. Thank you very much. I'll remember that quote."

No problem, in that case, consider yourself a troofer.

"Anyway, you might not find Arseholie's fantasies amusing, but I do."

I don't give a shit, and I'm not desperately obsessed with "debunking" them, typing reams of boring, baseless, speculative bullshit that is supposed to "support my case". You doddering dullard.

"I'm just not surprised that your pitiful little 'movement' of kooks [Troy Sexton], social failures [sackcloth and ashes] and KKK-types [Lazarus Long] can only attract clowns [Penn & Teller] like him to your cause."

d^-^b =-P

"Welcome to Failure."

Thanks for inviting me into your home. I would like the guided tour.

"Population - you, and a couple of other fuckups."

Yes, essentially, *me*, fucking up *you*.

 
At 03 June, 2010 10:46, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

Anon#2,don't worry bro,the insane bloke has already skidded off the short pier and sunk himself into oblivion.This is what happens to cult people when they get destroyed,stomped on and exposed as the windbags they are.At this point,he's relegated himself to the OCD wing of the Debunker Cult Infirmary.Why on the Planet Earth this sap is going on about this is a clear indication that his ass has been whupped on the issues and he's desperate.Of course,you noticed nothing on the microspheres,did you? The richest part of this nutcases insane medley is his shock and amazement that someone doesn't remember the name of a pub in shitty New Cross!!! Can you imagine the poor slob actually obsessing over my stays in the UK? The mind boggles at the utter absurdity of the weird jihad this man is on.He's even up to his old tricks,claiming that I claimed "to be partying a lot down in the West End".Never said that,never did that.Used to go to the West End for a cheap movie and especially for Foyle's and all the great book shops down there.Got a big buyout from our landlord in 1996 in NYC,went all over the States and Canada by car and then moved to the UK in 1997.That's all I'll ever say on this subject again.Fun exposing the Sack of Bollocks as the wackjob he is!!

 
At 03 June, 2010 11:33, Anonymous Anonymous said...

ConsDemo said...

Yeah cuze even the post office was in on it right? Its called indviduals within the government who did 9/11, not the whole country

Oh, here we go again, the stupid five people did it, crap. Sorry, asswipe, you are accusing the country of staging an attack on itself


Why are you not smart? Why do you label the country as people within the Federal Government?

Why do you think the Post Office did 9/11?

Why do you think the people think the entire country of 300 million?

Why are you posting the same stupid shit I sank you with 10 years ago here and at JREF?

Did the whole country do the Gulf of Tonkin? Did the whole country lie about WMDs? Did the whole country lie about not using torture?

Your a nitwhit that likes to put words into truthers mouths but I'm suprised you keep trying to do it because yours is so full of shit.

Only you are your ilk can turn a conspiracy of a few individuals into a 300 million person conspiracy.

Lets recap: the Federal Government is not the entire country. Go back to your shit high school and take government again.

 
At 03 June, 2010 11:44, Blogger GuitarBill said...

Anonymous dissembles, "...All that effort, all that typing, and you still didn't achieve your "gotcha" moment. Just some paranoid, conspiratorial innuendo and insinuation, tenuous accusations and pithy straw grasping desperation."

Projecting again, jizzmop?

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

 
At 03 June, 2010 15:55, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Billy, billy, billy.
Does your beautiful wife and two lovely daughters know you swear like a sailor. Saying jizzmop over and over again just makes you look like a punk kid.

and remember, we`re here just to make you look stupid.

 
At 03 June, 2010 19:30, Anonymous paul w said...

Anonymous (1&2)

The NIST report made it quite clear that if the steel columns in both Towers had not suffered the massive damage and destruction from the impact of the planes, the towers probably have would remained standing.

Go read it.

As for WTC7, the NIST report makes it quite clear why the thing fell (hint; uncontrolled fires, weakened steel, and the loss of support to one significant column when part of it collapsed).

Go read it.

But...as you have made quite clear, you don't want to know.

After all, why spoil a perfectly good fantasy?

 
At 04 June, 2010 05:18, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"I don't give a shit, and I'm not desperately obsessed with "debunking" them, typing reams of boring, baseless, speculative bullshit that is supposed to "support my case". You doddering dullard."


....the flatworm types as he posts "boring, baseless, speculative bullshit that is supposed to "support my case".


Disconnect from reality much?

 
At 04 June, 2010 05:20, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Arhoolie said..."

You stand on street corners and scream at poeople, don't you, arseholio?

 
At 04 June, 2010 12:45, Blogger GuitarBill said...

Anonymous whines, "...and remember, we`re here just to make you look stupid."

Arrogant, aren't you, jizzmop?

After all, you don't know the difference between your and you're, cretin. So, you're really in no position claim superiority on any issue, shit-for-brains.

And if you honestly believe that I'm "impressed" by the opinion, speculation, quote mined source material and pure bullshit you cut-and-paste from troofer loon websites, you have another coming, jizzmop.

So tell us, jizzmop, when will the orderlies at St Elizabeth's Hospital finally limit your internet access?

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

 
At 04 June, 2010 20:45, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I`ll ask again. Does YOUR beautiful wife and two lovely daughters know you come on the internet and write these old lame ass insults? And YOU`RE supposed to be the educated one here?

and remember we`re just here to make you look stoopid, jizzlips

 
At 05 June, 2010 09:20, Anonymous sackcloth and ashes said...

'Got a big buyout from our landlord in 1996 in NYC,went all over the States and Canada by car and then moved to the UK in 1997.'

Hang on, Walt. You're changing your story again. You said you made it over to Blighty (to Southport - of all places) in 1995, and that your baby boy was born over there. Now you're saying it was 1997 instead. Your story is changing with every post. Or maybe you're too high to remember all the shit that you type.

First there was 'A Real Veteran', now there's this screwed-up attempt (on the basis of a few Google searches) to make up a new life for yourself. No wonder the troofers attract fucked-up fantastists like you.

 
At 05 June, 2010 11:20, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

Poor,poor pitiful Sack of Shotspots,he sure is something!

 
At 05 June, 2010 12:43, Anonymous sackcloth and ashes said...

'Poor,poor pitiful Sack of Shotspots,he sure is something!'

Come on, Walt. The least you can do if you're trying to make shit up is be consistent.

But then I can see why you're a troofer. After all, your fantasy existence in my country has the same basis in reality as nano-thermite and remote controlled planes.

See help, Walt. You need to spend some time in a padded room without any sharp objects in it.

PS: When you talk about 'our landlord', then who else are you referring to. Did your mystery girlfriend come with you to learn how to dance in South East London? Don't they have any similar schools in NYC?

Come on Walt. Tell us some more tall tales.

 
At 07 June, 2010 16:16, Anonymous Arhoolie said...

Poor sap,and he won't even accept my treat of tickets to the Yankee game anytime he's ready to hit the big town! That's a whiny wimp for you.Can you see that anal retentive sociopath hanging in the city? I can't.My main man,you're barmy!

 
At 14 June, 2010 01:41, Anonymous sackcloth and ashes said...

You don't live in New York, Walt. You never lived in my country, let alone got laid there. You never served in Iraq. And nothing you type makes sense.

It must really suck being you.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home