Tuesday, January 24, 2012

A Funny Video And....

A serious response.  First the video:

And the reponse? I found this over at Truth Action, where a poster named Snow Job had this to say:
The folks over at SLC are extremists who hate everybody not on board with Republicanism, and have in fact declared Republicanism to be identical to a litmus test of being American, just like... basically every Republican who ever lived.
I have, in fact, never issued such a declaration, and I would find such a declaration ignorant. I am a Republican, yes, but I do not think that the GOP has a monopoly on the best ideas. I wrote one time at JREF that I think of liberals as the gas pedal, and conservatives as the brakes. Without liberals we'd never move forward, and without conservatives we'd pretty quickly drive off a cliff. It is the dynamic tension between the two parties that results in us moving forward but at a sensible pace. More important, note that Snow Job does exactly what he accuses me of doing: writing off the other side entirely.

91 Comments:

At 24 January, 2012 10:25, Blogger Ian said...

Not sure if I count as one of the "folks over at SLC" but I'm a proud Paul Krugman liberal. I'm sure I'd disagree with Pat and James on a lot of things, but they've never said anything nasty about my politics.

This blog isn't about left or right. It's about sanity versus delusions.

 
At 24 January, 2012 11:02, Blogger snug.bug said...

Your posts are about Ianane DelusIans.

 
At 24 January, 2012 11:04, Blogger Ian said...

Your posts are about Ianane DelusIans.

Brian, the adults are talking. Please go squeal elsewhere.

 
At 24 January, 2012 13:40, Blogger TruthersrAlwaysWrong said...

I commented on that exact video. Man that video made me LMFAO.

The guy kind of reminds me of our pet goat Brian.

 
At 24 January, 2012 14:43, Blogger Richard Gage's Testicles said...

Snowcrash: I also despise the conspiracy mongering,...

Uh, right, you'd never do that. Sukkel.

 
At 24 January, 2012 16:29, Blogger Billman said...

Did.. did Brian forget how to spell? Or did a 6 year old hack into his account for a second? Or has he always been a six year old.

 
At 24 January, 2012 16:34, Blogger TruthersrAlwaysWrong said...

Billman,

Brian's like a Tootsie Roll pop, the world may never know.

 
At 24 January, 2012 18:13, Blogger M Gregory Ferris said...

There are (probably) just as many right-wing troofers as lefties.

 
At 24 January, 2012 19:33, Blogger ConsDemo said...

Kind of laughable to hear twoofers accusing anyone else of hate. Twooferism is rooted in hate, pure and simple.

 
At 25 January, 2012 09:44, Blogger TruthersrAlwaysWrong said...

I think Yoda can explain all this hate the Truthers have:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJeKS0gNz48

 
At 25 January, 2012 10:32, Blogger snug.bug said...

I can't remember that any Truthers ever pissed on the dead.

 
At 25 January, 2012 10:36, Blogger TruthersrAlwaysWrong said...

I can't remember that any Truthers ever pissed on the dead.

How about Ground Zero where your kind of people constantly piss on the grave of thousands of New Yorkers spewing non-sense about their lives and constantly harassing the 9/11 Families with your rhetoric?

 
At 25 January, 2012 11:58, Blogger Ian said...

I can't remember that any Truthers ever pissed on the dead.

David Ray Griffin has repeatedly pissed on the grave of Todd Beamer, Jeff Bingham, and the rest of the UA 93 heroes.

But you don't know anything about 9/11, Brian, so I'm not surprised you don't know this.

 
At 25 January, 2012 12:06, Blogger Ian said...

Err, that's Mark Bingham, not Jeff. The point still stands.

 
At 25 January, 2012 12:07, Blogger Ian said...

You know that quote that got Mark Wahlberg in hot water recently? All the scrawny virgins and overweight gray-haired academics in the truth movement say shit like that all the time.

 
At 25 January, 2012 15:47, Blogger snug.bug said...

Perhaps you didn't understand me.

I can't remember that any Truthers ever pissed on the dead.

 
At 25 January, 2012 15:55, Blogger Ian said...

I can't remember that any Truthers ever pissed on the dead.

Then perhaps you should stop sniffing glue. It's done enough damage to your brain. Now it appears to be affecting your short-term memory.

 
At 25 January, 2012 16:08, Blogger snug.bug said...

No truthers have ever pissed on the dead.

 
At 25 January, 2012 16:09, Blogger Ian said...

No truthers have ever pissed on the dead.

Brian, you can squeal all you want, but everyone knows that truthers have pissed all over the dead.

And you can squeal all you want, but everyone knows you were expelled from the truth movement for stalking Carol Brouillet.

 
At 25 January, 2012 16:21, Blogger snug.bug said...

You lied 7 times in 2 sentences. Damn, you're much better than Ranke. It took him 12 sentences to tell 11 lies.

 
At 25 January, 2012 16:27, Blogger Ian said...

You lied 7 times in 2 sentences. Damn, you're much better than Ranke. It took him 12 sentences to tell 11 lies.

My, such squealing!

So has your "meatball on a fork" model been published yet?

 
At 25 January, 2012 20:45, Blogger snug.bug said...

It's not my model and there's no need to publish it--it comports nicely with the actual behavior of the lower cores, the baffling behavior of which is one of the 7 essential collapse mysteries from which NIST ran away, screaming and crying.

What you don't seem to understand is that there will be new investigations. Nothing we can do can stop it. Powerful new computers will be able to take the noise out of the videos, and they will be able to run simulations NIST claimed were too complicated for them to run in 2005.

When those new investigations are run the controlled demolitions theorists will be shown to be wrong or shown to be right. But those like me, who stuck to asserting that the NIST reports are incomplete, unscientific, and dishonest, will be shown to be right. That position is bulletproof.

 
At 25 January, 2012 21:29, Blogger Ian said...

It's not my model and there's no need to publish it--it comports nicely with the actual behavior of the lower cores, the baffling behavior of which is one of the 7 essential collapse mysteries from which NIST ran away, screaming and crying.

See what I mean? It's your model, as you are petgoat. Also, NIST didn't run away from anything. You just don't understand what they did because you're an illiterate liar who wears women's underwear.

What you don't seem to understand is that there will be new investigations. Nothing we can do can stop it. Powerful new computers will be able to take the noise out of the videos, and they will be able to run simulations NIST claimed were too complicated for them to run in 2005.

Yup, and when they don't conclude that magic thermite elves destroyed the towers, you'll start squealing and call the reports dishonest and unbelievable.

But those like me, who stuck to asserting that the NIST reports are incomplete, unscientific, and dishonest, will be shown to be right. That position is bulletproof.

False. Those like you will still be mocked as failed janitors who wear women's underwear, believe in modified attack baboons, and sniff glue.

But by all means, keep squealing about how your position is "bulletproof".

 
At 25 January, 2012 21:30, Blogger Ian said...

You're not really good at this, Brian. Maybe you should try a different deranged cult instead of 9/11 truth.

Do you like the Insane Clown Posse? You could become a Juggalo.

 
At 25 January, 2012 22:24, Blogger snug.bug said...

Ian, you have never provided a shred of evidence that I am petgoat, nor any evidence for any of your other claims about me. You live in a fantasy world surrounded by imaginary experts who tell you what you want to hear.

 
At 26 January, 2012 05:02, Blogger Grandmastershek said...

1 word Brian: Vicsims.

 
At 26 January, 2012 05:39, Blogger snug.bug said...

And what does vicsims have to do with the truth movement? What does it have to do with the widows' 273 unanswered questions, the 7 mysteries of the towers' collapse from which NIST ran away screaming and crying, the violations in the NIST theories of the laws of physics? What does it have to do with anything?

 
At 26 January, 2012 07:53, Blogger Ian said...

Ian, you have never provided a shred of evidence that I am petgoat, nor any evidence for any of your other claims about me.

Why do I need to provide evidence that you're petgoat? You told us that you're petgoat. You wanted everyone here to know that you are petgoat.

You live in a fantasy world surrounded by imaginary experts who tell you what you want to hear.

Squeal squeal squeal!

Poor Brian, he's been pwn3d again, and all he can do is squeal about it. Life's tough when you're a failed janitor who believes in modified attack baboons.

What does it have to do with the widows' 273 unanswered questions, the 7 mysteries of the towers' collapse from which NIST ran away screaming and crying, the violations in the NIST theories of the laws of physics?

Brian, your delusional beliefs have nothing to do with 9/11 either. That's why nobody pays you any attention except us, and we laugh at you. You can babble all you want about "widows" and "mysteries", but it won't change the fact that you're a delusional liar and failed janitor who lives with his parents.

 
At 26 January, 2012 09:51, Blogger snug.bug said...

Ian, you lied 15 times in that post.

I never said that I am petgoat.

 
At 26 January, 2012 09:59, Blogger Ian said...

Ian, you lied 15 times in that post.

False.

I never said that I am petgoat.

Why are you so embarrassed about being petgoat? Is it because everyone laughed at your for your loony babbling about rakes and meatballs and forks?

Believe me, there are plenty of other things to laugh at with you, like the fact that you ran away squealing and crying when Willie Rodriguez challenged you to a debate.

 
At 26 January, 2012 10:34, Blogger TruthersrAlwaysWrong said...

I can't remember that any Truthers ever pissed on the dead.

Thanks for confirming that you're brain dead. Denial at it's best right here.

No truthers have ever pissed on the dead.

Oops, another denial.

When those new investigations are run the controlled demolitions theorists will be shown to be wrong or shown to be right.

Chris Mohr over @ JREF will prove once and for all that thermite and explosives were never used. Tough shit for you, eh?

 
At 26 January, 2012 10:39, Blogger snug.bug said...

You're changing the subject. I never said I was petgoat, and you lied when you claimed I did.

If you think comparing steel structures to steel rakes and steel forks is funny, you would have had a real laugh riot with the physicists in the era of JJ Thompson who compared the atom to a plum pudding.

 
At 26 January, 2012 10:40, Blogger snug.bug said...

Toothless, name one time when truthers pissed on dead people.

 
At 26 January, 2012 11:33, Blogger Ian said...

You're changing the subject. I never said I was petgoat, and you lied when you claimed I did.

False. You said you were petgoat.

If you think comparing steel structures to steel rakes and steel forks is funny, you would have had a real laugh riot with the physicists in the era of JJ Thompson who compared the atom to a plum pudding.

Nobody cares about JJ Thompson. We're talking about your deranged comparison of the WTC collapse to a meatball on a fork and rakes on rakes. You were the subject of a ton a ridicule at Democratic Underground, which left you squealing.

 
At 26 January, 2012 11:44, Blogger Richard Gage's Testicles said...

Toothless, name one time when truthers pissed on dead people.

David Griscom claims that the United 93 victims were willing participants in the attacks. Cosmos lied about his relation to Mark Rothenberg. David Ray Griffin claims that the United 93 victims' phone calls were faked. Dylan Avery claims that the firefighters -- including, presumably, the dead ones -- are "bought and paid for." AE911Truth, in pushing for an investigation into WTC7, attempts to marginalize the 9/11 victims.

 
At 26 January, 2012 11:56, Blogger TruthersrAlwaysWrong said...

From "SnowJob":

Hence, Alexander Cockburn thinks 9/11 Truthers are nuts who think no planers are nuts but Pat Curley and James Bennet probably think Cockburn is a paranoid left wing nutter.

Actually I don't know what Pat or James thinks, other than SnowJob is a retard.

 
At 26 January, 2012 11:58, Blogger TruthersrAlwaysWrong said...

Toothless, name one time when truthers pissed on dead people.

Well with you being here pissing on people likethe Jersey Girls to Lary Silverstein and everyone in between, I think that confirms that you're pissing on people because you think it's funny. Also you piss on everyone here on SLC so why shouldn't I think that numbnuts?

 
At 26 January, 2012 12:00, Blogger TruthersrAlwaysWrong said...

You were the subject of a ton a ridicule at Democratic Underground, which left you squealing.

Ian, provide me a link so I can laugh at Brian.

 
At 26 January, 2012 12:16, Blogger Richard Gage's Testicles said...

Actually I don't know what Pat or James thinks, other than SnowJob is a retard.

Snowcrash raises a valid point though: 9/11 Truth encompasses everything from claims that are facially absurd ("no plane hit the Pentagon") to claims that are dubious ("molten steel was found in the rubble") to claims that have merit ("there needs to be accountability"). He's justifiably frustrated that most people don't care about the distinction and dismiss it all as "Troof".

I think the reason Responsible Truthers haven't had more success is that in the end, their claims are no better supported by facts than the crazy Truthers. You want Real Accountability (a.k.a. "punish somebody local")? Fine. Name names and specific wrongful acts. That's all it will take.

 
At 26 January, 2012 13:04, Blogger Ian said...

Ian, provide me a link so I can laugh at Brian.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x205525

This was my introduction to Brian and his brand of delusional megalomania. My favorite part is the "just you wait, gentlemen!" comment when people were laughing at his scribbles and his claim that they would appear in an engineering journal someday.

That was almost 4 years ago. We're still waiting.

 
At 26 January, 2012 13:06, Blogger Ian said...

And the funniest post in the thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=205525&mesg_id=235514

 
At 26 January, 2012 13:08, Blogger TruthersrAlwaysWrong said...

Thanks Ian, checking it out now.

 
At 26 January, 2012 13:13, Blogger TruthersrAlwaysWrong said...

I operate a lot in the failure
mode
- Petgoat

No shit?! LMFAO! We already know he does that.

I deliberately underbuild it

Underbuild = less structure. Holy flying cow!

My first project was as a
five-year-old


And he's still a 5 yr. old.

I don't use crayons 'cause I don't want to get wax on my scanner.

^^^^ The funniest statement I've ever heard. OMG! LOL!

 
At 26 January, 2012 13:18, Blogger TruthersrAlwaysWrong said...

Well I'm afraid I haven't been certified sane. Nobody's perfect,
I guess.
- Petgoat

No comment! (shakes head in disbelief and laughing)

 
At 26 January, 2012 13:24, Blogger M Gregory Ferris said...

"I can't remember that any Truthers ever pissed on the dead."

The phone calls from the panes are faked = Pissing on the dead.

United 93 was shot down = pissing on the dead.

The passengers of AA77 were secretly landed and taken from the plane = pissing on the dead.

WTC collapse was contolled demo (meaning the Port Authority was in on it, and let their brother officers die) = pissing on the dead.

Joining the Troof movement to hit on chicks and sexually harass Carol Broulliet, and pursue a private agenda of destruction = pissing on the dead.

 
At 27 January, 2012 00:30, Blogger snug.bug said...

You guys are showing your ignorance about pissing on the dead.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TMq3m_Oli4

http://www.usatoday.com/news/military/story/2012-01-11/marines-afghanistan-urinate-taliban-video/52506118/1

You might recall that the original context of the discussion was about hate.

 
At 27 January, 2012 06:12, Blogger Grandmastershek said...

No truthers have ever pissed on the dead.

And what does vicsims have to do with the truth movement?....God I hope no one notices this attempt to change the subject.

Keep dancing Brian.

http://septemberclues.info/vicsims.htm

 
At 27 January, 2012 06:35, Blogger Richard Gage's Testicles said...

You might recall that the original context of the discussion was about hate.

Oh, sorry. Didn't mean to derail the thread.

 
At 27 January, 2012 07:34, Blogger Ian said...

You guys are showing your ignorance about pissing on the dead.

My, such squealing!

Petgoat doesn't like that he's part of a cult that pisses on the dead, so he's going to bury those claims in dumbspam.

 
At 27 January, 2012 09:55, Blogger snug.bug said...

GMS, you're only proving my point. September Clues has been rejected and repudiated by the truth movement.

 
At 27 January, 2012 10:21, Blogger TruthersrAlwaysWrong said...

You guys are showing your ignorance about pissing on the dead.

You constantly piss on our wounded and dead soldiers who are coming from Afghanistan and Iraq (yeah, I know Iraq's over but still).

 
At 27 January, 2012 10:40, Blogger snug.bug said...

Truthless, nobody has pissed on the vets. You are confusing a metaphor with reality.

 
At 27 January, 2012 11:12, Blogger Ian said...

GMS, you're only proving my point. September Clues has been rejected and repudiated by the truth movement.

How do you know? You've been expelled from the truth movement for being a perverted sex stalker and obsessed lunatic.

 
At 27 January, 2012 11:32, Blogger TruthersrAlwaysWrong said...

nobody has pissed on the vets. You are confusing a metaphor with reality.

Then why don't you retract your statement about Truthers (like you) pissing on the dead?

 
At 27 January, 2012 15:25, Blogger snug.bug said...

Ian, where did you get the silly notion that I've been expelled from the truth movement?

Truthless, the truthers haven't pissed on anybody.

 
At 28 January, 2012 08:50, Blogger Ian said...

Ian, where did you get the silly notion that I've been expelled from the truth movement?

From Carol Brouillet, which is where I get the idea that you're a lunatic pervert who was stalking her and trying to wreck her marriage. You told her husband that she was sleeping with Kevin Barrett.

Truthless, the truthers haven't pissed on anybody.

Brian, you can keep lying about this like you lie about being petgoat, but nobody is actually going to listen to you.

 
At 28 January, 2012 09:37, Blogger TruthersrAlwaysWrong said...

the truthers haven't pissed on anybody.

You're not a member of the Truth Movement anymore, you can't stand up for them. You're an outcast of their useless existence.

 
At 28 January, 2012 13:08, Blogger snug.bug said...

Ian, when did Carol Brouillet give you the impression that I had been expelled from the truth movement? Where did you get the idea that I was stalking her and trying to wreck her marriage? Where did you get the idea that I told her husband that she was sleeping with Kevin Barrett?

Truthless, the truthers haven't pissed on anybody. You can't back up your claim that they have.

 
At 28 January, 2012 13:29, Blogger Ian said...

Ian, when did Carol Brouillet give you the impression that I had been expelled from the truth movement?

When she said you were expelled from the truth movement.

What's hilarious is that you yourself acknowledge that you were thrown out of the movement:

http://www.911oz.com/vbulletin/archive/index.php?t-8130.html

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!!!

Where did you get the idea that I was stalking her and trying to wreck her marriage?

From Carol. It's just like I got the idea that you're petgoat from you, because you claimed to be petgoat. SATSQ.

Where did you get the idea that I told her husband that she was sleeping with Kevin Barrett?

You said she was sleeping with Willie Rodriguez too.

Truthless, the truthers haven't pissed on anybody. You can't back up your claim that they have.

Poor Brian, he's been pwn3d so badly that all he can do is stick his fingers in his ears and start squealing.

I imagine there's going to be a ton of squealing and crying from Brian now that I've shown his own quote in which he acknowledged being expelled from the truth movement. I expect he'll call us "girls" too.

 
At 28 January, 2012 13:30, Blogger Ian said...

Also, Brian, can you tell me if the widows will have their questions answered this week? I'm tired of waiting on this.

 
At 28 January, 2012 13:50, Blogger snug.bug said...

Ian, you lie, as usual. Your link does not have me saying I was thrown out of the truth movement.

There is no reason to believe any of your evidence-free claims about Ms. Brouillet.

You seem to have some trouble understanding that the fact that Obama won't support a new investigation makes the issue MORE important, rather than less important.

 
At 28 January, 2012 14:09, Blogger Ian said...

Ian, you lie, as usual. Your link does not have me saying I was thrown out of the truth movement.

And there's the squealing and crying we expected from our ex-truther. Thanks Brian!

There is no reason to believe any of your evidence-free claims about Ms. Brouillet.

Poor Brian, I've humiliated him so many times that I almost feel bad for him.

You seem to have some trouble understanding that the fact that Obama won't support a new investigation makes the issue MORE important, rather than less important.

Nobody cares about having a new investigation, Brian. It's time to move on and accept that you're failed at this, just as you've failed at everything else you've attempted in life, which is why you're an unemployed janitor with no friends, no family, and nothing to do but sniff glue while wearing women's underwear.

 
At 28 January, 2012 16:08, Blogger snug.bug said...

Ian, you are a liar. The 9/11 widows care about a new investigation, the 18,000 who signed their petition care about a new investigation, the 18,000 who signed the AE911Truth petition care about a new investigation.

Since polls show that in 2006 36% of American adults thought the Controlled Demolition hypothesis was credible, since that was before Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth entered the public dialogue and since the intellectual bankruptcy of debunker sites has been clearly demonstrated, it's likely that something more like 50% of Americans find CD credible today--and none of your yip-yappy lies can change that.

 
At 28 January, 2012 16:32, Blogger Ian said...

Ian, you are a liar. The 9/11 widows care about a new investigation, the 18,000 who signed their petition care about a new investigation, the 18,000 who signed the AE911Truth petition care about a new investigation.

Thanks for proving my point. Nobody cares about a new investigation, no matter how much delusional spam you post.

Since polls show that in 2006 36% of American adults thought the Controlled Demolition hypothesis was credible, since that was before Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth entered the public dialogue and since the intellectual bankruptcy of debunker sites has been clearly demonstrated, it's likely that something more like 50% of Americans find CD credible today--and none of your yip-yappy lies can change that.

Yup, that's my Brian: squealing and crying over the fact that the truth movement is dead and his "widows" will never have their questions answered.

 
At 28 January, 2012 18:16, Blogger snug.bug said...

Ian, I don't know where you went to school, but where I come the citing of valid statistics can not easily be dismissed as "squealing and crying".

 
At 28 January, 2012 22:43, Blogger M Gregory Ferris said...

"Ian, I don't know where you went to school, but where I come the citing of valid statistics can not easily be dismissed as "squealing and crying"."

Sesame Street?

 
At 29 January, 2012 10:12, Blogger snug.bug said...

That's about right--for Ian.

 
At 29 January, 2012 11:13, Blogger Ian said...

Ian, I don't know where you went to school, but where I come the citing of valid statistics can not easily be dismissed as "squealing and crying".

Since when are the numbers that the voices in your head are telling you "valid statistics"?

That's about right--for Ian.

Poor Brian. He's been completely humiliated.

 
At 29 January, 2012 11:46, Blogger snug.bug said...

The numbers are from a Scripps Howard poll taken in July 2006. They are valid statistics.

 
At 29 January, 2012 11:56, Blogger Ian said...

The numbers are from a Scripps Howard poll taken in July 2006. They are valid statistics.

False.

 
At 29 January, 2012 12:00, Blogger snug.bug said...

You're a liar.

 
At 29 January, 2012 14:01, Blogger Ian said...

You're a liar.

False.

 
At 29 January, 2012 23:53, Blogger Mike Rosefierce said...

OK, let's see who the liar is.

From the 2006 Scripps Howard poll:

"The collapse of the twin towers in New York was aided by explosives secretly planted in the two buildings."
Very likely 6%
Somewhat likely 10%
Unlikely 77%
Don't know 6%
Other response 1%

6% plus 10% is not 36%, Brian. So you either (1) were brazenly lying to us, or (2) are so out of touch with reality that you truly believe 36% of Americans agree with you about CD.

The truth is, Brian, you're part of the 6% ultra-fringe who think CD is "very likely". To put that number in perspective, 26% of Americans believe in astrology and 20% believe in reincarnation. Your brand of trutherism has a long, long way to go to become an A-list pseudoscience.

 
At 30 January, 2012 01:06, Blogger snug.bug said...

Mike, I said 36 million Americans.

15% from the Scripps Howard poll makes 36 million.

Before you label 9/11 Truth as pseudoscience you need to explain NIST's dodges of the contradictions between their theory and the 1st and 2d law of thermodynamics and Newton's 1st and 3rd laws.

 
At 30 January, 2012 03:22, Blogger Mike Rosefierce said...

"Mike, I said 36 million Americans."

No, you said 36 percent and you meant 36 percent. Your words:

"Since polls show that in 2006 36% of American adults thought the Controlled Demolition hypothesis was credible ... it's likely that something more like 50% of Americans find CD credible today"

You wrote 36% and then 50%. Do you not know what "%" means? Your claim that you meant "36 million" could only be true if the US population were 36 million / 0.16 = 225 million. But the US population exceeds 300 million. In other words, you're either full of sh*t or unable to do simple math (or more likely, both).

The mainstream account of the collapses violates no natural laws. If you kooks could prove otherwise, we would be seeing your proofs in reputable scientific channels. But you can't. How frustrating it must be to be a pseudoscientist.

 
At 30 January, 2012 07:21, Blogger Ian said...

Mike, I said 36 million Americans.

You said 36%, Brian. You're not even a good liar.

Before you label 9/11 Truth as pseudoscience you need to explain NIST's dodges of the contradictions between their theory and the 1st and 2d law of thermodynamics and Newton's 1st and 3rd laws.

Sure. These "contradictions" are the delusions of a failed janitor, liar, and lunatic who wears women's underwear, was expelled from the truth movement, and believes in modified attack baboons, magic thermite elves, and invisible widows.

 
At 30 January, 2012 07:23, Blogger Ian said...

Don't worry, Brian. We already knew you were a pathetic liar before you started babbling about 36% of Americans. After all, you lie about not being petgoat, and you lie about running away squealing and crying from a debate with Willie Rodriguez.

 
At 30 January, 2012 09:32, Blogger snug.bug said...

You're right. I said 36%. I meant 36 million.

Back in 2006 36% thought it was somewhat likely or very likely that Federal officials either assisted in the 9/11 attacks or took no action to prevent them because they wanted a war. Probably the percentage is higher now.

 
At 30 January, 2012 09:40, Blogger Ian said...

Back in 2006 36% thought it was somewhat likely or very likely that Federal officials either assisted in the 9/11 attacks or took no action to prevent them because they wanted a war. Probably the percentage is higher now.

Hey, if a glue-sniffing failed janitor who babbles about magic thermite elves says the percentage is higher, who are we to argue?

I mean, just look at how much Romney and Gingrich are battling each other to claim that their new investigation will be the better one. They're obviously trying to get that huge chunk of the electorate that is "truther".

 
At 30 January, 2012 10:12, Blogger TruthersrAlwaysWrong said...

the truthers haven't pissed on anybody. You can't back up your claim that they have.

You statements reguarding them as vicsims and non-existant truely show that you and ever single Truther on the planet has.

Keep digging that hole, you might wind up in communist held North Korea.

 
At 30 January, 2012 10:39, Blogger snug.bug said...

Ian, I didn't say it. A Scripps Howard poll said it. You seem to think you live in a world where everything is just a question of rival opinions, and none of them need to be based in fact. That's why you have such a difficult time comprehending the laws of physics--because you think they're trumped by your opinions.

ToothlessandAlwaysWrong, I've never heard of any truthers urinating on the dead.

 
At 30 January, 2012 10:44, Blogger TruthersrAlwaysWrong said...

I've never heard of any truthers urinating on the dead.

Jon Gold, Kevin Ryan, Dylan Avery, Jason Bermas, Aelx Jones and every top Truther has SAID ON RADIO OR VIDEOS that the people in the planes and people in the Towers were either "in on it" or "vicsims".

You can't even provide a counter arguement because you know for a FACT that waht they said is captured on audio and listened to by millions worldwide.

So to say that they pissed on the victims wen they made jokes about their existence on radio and video proves that they do piss on the dead.

No amount of squealing can't prove me wrong about what I just said.

 
At 30 January, 2012 10:48, Blogger TruthersrAlwaysWrong said...

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

Dylan Avery: Ha Ha Ha Ha! Have you seen how small those things [box cutters] are? Like, if I was on a flight, with, you know, at least 50 other people – because that's the smallest number I think was on 9/11* – if I was in the cabin, with 50 other people, and five people – I don't care if they're Muslim or not – stand upwith box cutters and say they're gonna hijack the plane, I'm gonna laugh in their face!

That's pissing on the dead.

Avery: Yeah, he said that in the same interview where he said that a missile hit the Pentagon.

Blood: OH MY GOD! HE'S GOT A PLASTIC KNIFE!

Avery: HAHAHA!

Blood: RUN!

Avery: HE'S GOT A BUTTER KNIFE FROM BREAKFAST! OH, NO!

This is also pissing on the dead

 
At 30 January, 2012 10:51, Blogger TruthersrAlwaysWrong said...

Hey SuperLogicalThinker, I mean Brian, I know who you are on JREF.

 
At 30 January, 2012 10:59, Blogger Ian said...

Ian, I didn't say it. A Scripps Howard poll said it.

False. You said it because you're a delusional liar.

You seem to think you live in a world where everything is just a question of rival opinions, and none of them need to be based in fact.

Well, none of your opinions are based in fact. That's why you're dumb/insane enough to believe in 9/11 truth fantasies.

That's why you have such a difficult time comprehending the laws of physics--because you think they're trumped by your opinions.

See what I mean? You think your insane babbling about physics is supposed to convince anyone.

 
At 30 January, 2012 13:53, Blogger TruthersrAlwaysWrong said...

Brian hasn't been on here hardly anymore. I think he's so preoccupied at JREF that he doesn't have the time.

 
At 30 January, 2012 21:14, Blogger snug.bug said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 30 January, 2012 22:20, Blogger snug.bug said...

Truthless and Wacko, words are words and urine is urine. Where do you get the idea that words are urine?

Ian, the Scripps Howard poll of 2006 showed that 36% of sdults thought it was somewhat likely or very likely that Federal officials either assisted in the 9/11 attacks or took no action to prevent them because they wanted a war.

Your baseless opinions do not trump provable facts.

I am not babbling about physics. I am not babbling about anything. hining, squealing, babbling--you could use that same argument with equal illegitimacy on Jesus, Einstein, Shakespeare, and Marx. For an argument by ridicule to prevail, the ridiculer must have some intellectual or moral stature. And you have none. It also helps if the ridiculer demonstrates some degree of wit. And you don't. Your jokes are ponderous, labored, and stupid.

 
At 30 January, 2012 22:51, Blogger M Gregory Ferris said...

"Where do you get the idea that words are urine?"

Urine on a fork?


"Your baseless opinions do not trump provable facts."

No, but Ian's baseless opinions trump your psychotic rantings.


"I am not babbling about physics. I am not babbling about anything. hining, squealing, babbling--you could use that same argument with equal illegitimacy on..."

Get ready for the list of folks Brian equates himself:

"Jesus"...yet Christ was a Jew, he might have been in on 9/11.

" Einstein"

Another Jew, Brian, Troofers can't trust them. Also Einstein was challenged, and welcomed this...because he was a scientist and not mentally ill.

" Shakespeare"

There are libraries full of criticism on the Barb. Goes with the territory.


"... and Marx."

Everybody loved Groucho, unless you're talking about Harpo, but I think everyone liked him too.



"For an argument by ridicule to prevail, the ridiculer must have some intellectual or moral stature..."


...relative to his target. You sexually harrassed Carol. You harass Willie Rodriguez because he isn't white. You are considered a laughing stock withing the 9/11 Truth movement, and the bay area peace community.

Unless Ian is a child molester or a Congressman he's got it all over you.

"It also helps if the ridiculer demonstrates some degree of wit. And you don't. Your jokes are ponderous, labored, and stupid."

Translation: I'm jealous because my damaged mind cannot operate on Ian's level, and I can't tell when people are joking because of my Asperger. I need to get laid by someone who doesn't charge me.

 
At 31 January, 2012 06:55, Blogger Ian said...

Ian, the Scripps Howard poll of 2006 showed that 36% of sdults thought it was somewhat likely or very likely that Federal officials either assisted in the 9/11 attacks or took no action to prevent them because they wanted a war.

Nobody cares.

Your baseless opinions do not trump provable facts.

Squeal squeal squeal!

I am not babbling about physics.

False.

I am not babbling about anything. Whining, squealing, babbling--you could use that same argument with equal illegitimacy on Jesus, Einstein, Shakespeare, and Marx.

Um, no. Shakespeare was not babbling. Einstein had, um, reality on his side. Marx made forecasts that turned out to be wrong, which is kind of like you and your forecast that "meatball on a fork" would appear in an engineering journal.

Jesus is a bit like you, given that he appears (to this atheist) to be a bit of a delusional weirdo in the Gospels. However, he also had some great advice for people. You have nothing but dumbspam. Also, Jesus faced torture and execution and did not shrink from it. You're such a coward that you ran away squealing and crying from Willie Rodriguez' debate challenge.

For an argument by ridicule to prevail, the ridiculer must have some intellectual or moral stature. And you have none. It also helps if the ridiculer demonstrates some degree of wit. And you don't. Your jokes are ponderous, labored, and stupid.

Poor Brian, he knows he's a failed janitor and liar and all he can do is post dumbspam about it.

 
At 31 January, 2012 09:22, Blogger TruthersrAlwaysWrong said...

Truthless and Wacko, words are words and urine is urine. Where do you get the idea that words are urine?

JAQing off isn't getting you no where fast you little insignificant faggot.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home