Monday, April 25, 2011

Much Hilarity

In this thread over at Truth Action. It starts out as an observation that the Truthers have become Victor (Thorn) and Lisa (Guliani)'s dream movement. They were early Truthers; it was on their show that Dylan Avery accused Bernard Brown of "sending his son to die."

But the discussion diverges quite a bit from the original topic, and that's where it gets really amusing. When talking about the deep hole "we" are in, Jon Gold notes:

Oh, we definitely need a revolution in this country. Cindy and I tried to start one, but no one showed up.


Yes, many revolutions have started with idiots chaining themselves to fences.

Later, the topic of the insurance on WTC-7 comes up and the discussion becomes quite ridiculous. Remember, this is in a thread where the Troof Action folks are all upset that their movement has become the controlled demolition movement:

I was wondering... the insurance companies had to pay Silverstein billions right? If there was something to "Controlled Demolition" of the buildings, wouldn't the insurance companies investigate that possibility so as to not have to pay Larry?


An insurance company pursuing "controlled demolition"? Fat chance. These people aren't stupid. They know how to assess risk for themselves too.


Yep, the insurance companies didn't laugh the controlled demolition claims off as baseless; they knew the CD folks were right but paid off the insurance policy anyway.

The insurance issue merits investigation by someone who knows the business. On WTC7, the fact that Industrial Risk Insurers paid off the $861 million claim before the FEMA report was even released, and thus with little investigation, strikes me as strange. I bet IRI's investigators anticipated a very interesting project, and were much surprised when the payout was made.


I suspect that the anthrax attacks made the insurers unwilling to challenge the government, even for a $6 billion payout. As I recall, the offices of the National Enquirer in Florida had to be abandoned after anthrax mailed in contaminated the entire building. That would represent a major threat to insurers. Imagine if landmark buildings were dusted with anthrax. Nobody would ever want to work there again, not even after decontamination. The threat to the insurance companies was great.


Those last two are from Brian Good.

21 Comments:

At 25 April, 2011 10:59, Blogger snug.bug said...

Something I've noticed in my years of forensic blogging is that some people prefer to speculate about the identity of anonymous internet posters rather than attempt to mount a coherent argument.

Normally the issue is raised by unintelligent posters, so I'm surprised to find Pat--who is not unintelligent--indulging in such foolishness. It only shows how tolerance for a dumbspammer like Ian can corrupt a forum all the way to the top.

 
At 25 April, 2011 11:26, Blogger Grandmastershek said...

LOL! I love the spot about Danny Jowneko. When you go to the link its a list of alleged CD experts (Tom Sullivan included so we know the list is at least partially BS)and Danny Jowenko's part says "See his opinion on WTC 7". Typical truther cherry picking.

 
At 25 April, 2011 11:39, Blogger Grandmastershek said...

Christ....going through the rest of those "experts" shows not 1 of them have a grasp of the realities of 9/11 or what "the official story" is. Surprise, surprise.

 
At 25 April, 2011 12:11, Blogger GuitarBill said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 25 April, 2011 12:18, Blogger GuitarBill said...

The Palo Alto Pud Huffer whines, "...Something I've noticed in my years of forensic blogging is that some people prefer to speculate about the identity of anonymous internet posters rather than attempt to mount a coherent argument."

Apparently, in the goat molester's world, compulsive lying, Al Qeada apologetics, and the wanton dissemination of conspiracy theories and far left-wing propaganda are defined as "forensic blogging."

What you fail to recognize, gay boi, is that the stench of your dishonesty, conceit and world-class stupidity precedes you.

 
At 25 April, 2011 12:28, Blogger Pat said...

Brian, which narrative are you pushing today?

1. Petgoat isn't Brian Good?
2. True Beleaguer isn't Brian Good?
3. Snug.bug isn't Brian Good?

Or are you just employing some arch meta-criticism?

 
At 25 April, 2011 12:31, Blogger GuitarBill said...

"narrative"??????

Don't you mean bald-faced lie?

 
At 25 April, 2011 13:52, Blogger Steve Horgan said...

Oh God, insurance companies paid out because the buildings were insured against terrorism. If there was any possibility that anything had happened that was not insured then they wouldn't have paid, but that would have required actual evidence in the legal definition of the word. There wasn't any real evidence of anything other than a terrorist attack that would stand up in any court, and so they paid up. It's really as simple as that.

 
At 25 April, 2011 15:05, Blogger Triterope said...

I think it's more sad than funny.

Jon Gold and the other losers on that thread blame their failures on everybody but themselves. And act like it's the world's responsibility to make everything as easy as possible for them.

It's the media's fault for not asking the questions they think should be asked. It's the TV networks' fault for not letting them broadcast "Press For Truth" on an endless loop. It's other Truthers' fault for not having the same views as them. It's everybody's fault for not coming to their stupid protests. Wah wah waaaaaaaaah.

Nobody said rewriting history and overthrowing a government was going to be easy, you clueless pack of self-entitled whiners.

 
At 25 April, 2011 15:11, Blogger GuitarBill said...

Triterope wrote, "...Nobody said rewriting history and overthrowing a government was going to be easy, you clueless pack of self-entitled whiners."

Exactly! Well said, Triterope.

 
At 25 April, 2011 16:42, Blogger Ian said...

Yes, many revolutions have started with idiots chaining themselves to fences.

What made it even funnier was that Jon's cry for attention happened at the same time as an ACTUAL mass-movement revolution that toppled an ACTUAL corrupt dictatorship in Egypt. The contrast between the courage of thousands of ordinary Egyptians and the stupidity of Jon Gold was extra special.

 
At 25 April, 2011 16:44, Blogger Ian said...

Something I've noticed in my years of forensic blogging is that some people prefer to speculate about the identity of anonymous internet posters rather than attempt to mount a coherent argument.

"Forensic blogging". Boy, that's a new classic from the annals of Brian Good's idiocy. It might actually be funnier than "meatball on a fork" or "smoldering carpets".

Normally the issue is raised by unintelligent posters, so I'm surprised to find Pat--who is not unintelligent--indulging in such foolishness. It only shows how tolerance for a dumbspammer like Ian can corrupt a forum all the way to the top.

My, such squealing!

 
At 26 April, 2011 02:16, Blogger snug.bug said...

Steve, I don't think anyone would dispute the fact that the WTC towers were destroyed with 300o people inside by terrorists. The question is, who were the terrorists?

TR, Obama should have overthrown the Bush regime the moment that he was elected. That he didn't brings up questions about whether we really live in a democracy.

 
At 26 April, 2011 04:39, Blogger Ian said...

Steve, I don't think anyone would dispute the fact that the WTC towers were destroyed with 300o people inside by terrorists. The question is, who were the terrorists?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijackers_in_the_September_11_attacks

If you spent less time squealing about Willie Rodriguez and more time actually researching 9/11, you'd know this.

TR, Obama should have overthrown the Bush regime the moment that he was elected.

Um, that's not how the country works, Brian. If you learned to google, you'd know about this little document called the Constitution. It doesn't change because a burnt out far-left failed janitor from Palo Alto, CA wants to have his revenge fantasies played out.

 
At 26 April, 2011 04:40, Blogger Ian said...

That he didn't brings up questions about whether we really live in a democracy.

Questions about what, Brian? Torture and the justifications for invading Iraq? Sure.

But there's a reason he didn't bring up questions about 9/11: it's because there are no unanswered questions about 9/11. You can babble about magic thermite elves and modified attack baboons all you want, but you only believe in that stuff because you're an ingnorant insane failed janitor. Normal people understand what happened on 9/11.

 
At 26 April, 2011 06:12, Blogger Pat said...

TR, Obama should have overthrown the Bush regime the moment that he was elected. That he didn't brings up questions about whether we really live in a democracy.

The moment he was elected? Isn't there some sort of constitutionally-mandated transition period? Hint: See Amendment XX.

 
At 26 April, 2011 11:08, Blogger Triterope said...

TR, Obama should have

Shut the fuck up, Brian.

 
At 26 April, 2011 13:50, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Something I've noticed in my years of forensic blogging"

You do realize, do you not, that you are quite insane?

 
At 26 April, 2011 13:52, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"The question is, who were the terrorists?"

al Queda.

Every sane person in the world knows that.

 
At 26 April, 2011 14:11, Blogger Richard Gage's Testicles said...

TR, Obama should have overthrown the Bush regime the moment that he was elected.

Wouldn't that have been illegal?

 
At 26 April, 2011 21:31, Blogger Triterope said...

Yeah, it's funny how that works. The ones who whine about America being a police state are the first ones to throw out the laws and the Constitution to get what they want.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home