Some of Jon Gold's Co-Signers
Jon's been flogging his "Statement for 9-11 Justice" petition lately; these folks certainly know how to circulate petitions; submitting them somewhere effective, not so much. Anyway, the signers are pretty much the usual crackpots: Cindy Sheehan, Dahlia Wasfi, Ray McGovern, Daniel Sunjata, etc. But just for fun, I googled some of the names on page 11:
Andrew Coldrick. Andrew has a page on Causes.com of all the causes he's into. Aside from 9-11 Truth, he's opposed to chemtrails, Zionists, RFID chips and aspartame, supports Ron Paul, and believes that cannabis cures cancer. In short, he fits the Truther demo to a T.
James David Childers. Possibly this guy, who certainly has some interests in common with Manny Badillo.
Helen Harris-Scott. Sued Michael Jackson's estate for $50 million.
This isn't the woman's first legal battle with Jackson, either. Nor is it the first one she's likely to lose, or the first she probably concocted after a few too many drinks.
Helen Harris-Scott filed a lawsuit against Michael in 2006, claiming Jackson installed a tracking device in her car, wiretapped her phone and even had "organized criminals watching me inside my house in L.A. and reporting to him."
posted by Pat @ 1:12 PM
153 comments
153 Comments:
Pat, how do experienced debunkers know that I'm a pothead?
Answer: Because I studied 10 years for a urine test.
My motto: Internet--the final frontier. The gobbledegook you're about to read are the lies and obsessions of Brian "sex stalker for 9/11 troof" Good. My ten-year mission: to explore new methods of deception; to seek out and formulate new logical fallacies; to boldly go where no Internet troll has gone before.
Not quite going viral yet, judging from signature counts. More like antiviral.
"James David Childers. Possibly this guy, who certainly has some interests in common with Manny Badillo."
How many "James David Childers" can there be other than Jr. and his dad? Jr. is a repeat offender.
http://mugshots.com/US-Counties/Florida/Marion-County-FL/James-David-Childers.7818964/details/
I see only one of Brian Good's "widows" has signed the petition. The other 3 have not, and thus by a count of 3-1, do not want a new investigation.
Look at some of the signatures:
Andrew Coldrick on Aug 4, 2012
Andrew Coldrick on Aug 20, 2012
Trent Balzer on Aug 13, 2012
Trent Balzer on Aug 20, 2012
Alan Olive on Aug 5, 2012
Alan Olive on Aug 6, 2012
Alan Olive on Aug 20, 2012
Barbara Williams on Aug 10, 2012
Barbara Williams on Aug 17, 2012
Bernie on Aug 16, 2012
Bernie on Aug 17, 2012
DAVID Martin on Aug 4, 2012
DAVID MARTIN on Aug 18, 2012
John Hughes on Aug 8, 2012
John Hughes on Aug 8, 2012
Jon Fox,Maj.USMCR,Ret. on Aug 6, 2012
Jon Fox,Maj.USMCR,Ret. on Aug 17, 2012
Nancy Perkinson on Aug 7, 2012
Nancy Perkinson on Aug 16, 2012
Paul Fried on Aug 5, 2012
Paul Fried on Aug 7, 2012
Rick Smith on Aug 6, 2012
Rick Smith on Aug 14, 2012
Robert Grady on Aug 8, 2012
Robert Grady on Aug 10, 2012
Adam Williams on Aug 6, 2012
Adam Williams on Aug 8, 2012
Robert Lockwood Mills on Aug 5, 2012
Robert Lockwood Mills on Aug 17, 2012
Tanya Becker on Aug 7, 2012
Tanya Becker on Aug 11, 2012
Yeah, there could be two different signees named Rick Smith. But two Jon Fox Maj.USMCR Ret.? Three Alan Olives? I call foul.
Here's how "9/11 Justice" is faring relative to some other critical issues of our time:
Statement For 9/11 Justice
543 signatures since August 4
Don't End Victorious, Nickolodeon
1209 signatures since August 12
Give us a Dawson's Creek reunion
1417 signatures since August 8
Save Junior the Akita from being put to sleep
557 signatures since August 9
Alas, 500+ signatures weren't enough to save poor Junior, who was put to sleep by Tri-City Animal Shelter in Fremont, CA.
Also
Diane K, Morris on Aug 17, 2012
Diane K. Morris on Aug 17, 2012
Thanks guys for keeping an eye out for dupes. I'm deleting them now. You guys are a big help!
Someone like Diane K. Morris must have submitted her name 2x at the same time because they were one right after the other. Those are obviously easier to spot than the others. If they use different email addresses, there's no way to tell if it is a dupe or not. So, keep up the good work, and let me know if there are any more dupes. You can email me at Gold9472@comcast.net
By the way, over 500 signatures in a little over 2 weeks isn't bad considering I'm the only one really promoting it. The "mainstream 9/11 Truth Movement" is not promoting it or signing it as they should because it doesn't mention "Controlled Demolition," etc... What can ya do?
Oh, and don't forget to sign it! Thanks!
"Those are obviously easier to spot than the others."
Ever heard of a sorting algorithm?
Probably not. You'll probably be shocked to discover that all modern computer operating systems are equipped with a sorting alogorithm.
Carry on corpulent conspiracist.
You guys are doing a good enough job.
They can't have a Dawson's Creek reunion after they killed off Jen in the finale.
Pat, I signed Jon Gold's petition three times using the following pseudonyms:
"Hu Flung Pu"
"Blow Jay Simpson"
and
"Heywood Jeblowme"
A fuckin' genius, aren't I?
My motto: Internet--the final frontier. The gobbledegook you're about to read are the lies and obsessions of Brian "sex stalker for 9/11 troof" Good. My ten-year mission: to explore new methods of deception; to seek out and formulate new logical fallacies; to boldly go where no Internet troll has gone before.
What about signers who express or hint at their believe in controlled demolition in the comments? You got about 20 of these:
30 Aaron Peterson
49 Anonymous
57 Richard E. Quiggle
67 John V. Mizzi, PE
91 Stephen Fournier
104 William MacDonald Gibb
112 Jerry Stevens
124 Rachel Morosky
295 Karl A Kautz
364 Mark Ahern
368 Carl Scariati
380 Ron Dotson
386 Wat Stearns
420 David L. Porowski
428 James Robert Coyle
438 Kimberly Talboo
451 Paul Whitcomb
514 Geert Heldager Nielsen
You have about 60 people who also signed the AE911T petition (all but one as one of the 15K "Other Supporters" - interesting - the architects and engineers seem significantly less likely to sign on to another petition...). I could wade through their personal statements at ae911t...
Jon,
you had expressed your hope that this would "go viral" - this means that the people who sign tell other people to sign also, and thus create organic growth, with number of signatures increasing exponentially. I told you this would not happen.
And of course it doesn't: In the first 5 full days (excluding aug 04, which was only part of a day and thus had fewer signatures), you had 51 signatures on average. In the second 5 days, it was down to 32 per day, and in the third 5 days only 14.
Got a graph for you:
JonGoldPoll_Actual_0804-0820.jpg
The purple line is the growth of total numbers. The blue line is new signatures per day. I added a trend line, calculated by LibreOffice as an exponential curve. As you can see, your virus is getting extinct. By mid-september you may be glad if you get one more signer any given day. I told you'd never reach 1000.
Many of those signers are the same old people. I see ae911t in large numbers, I see 911oz, I see of course your own crowd of activists around the families. You are doing a nice roll-call, and it documents that the Truth Movement in 2012 has declined to a mere few hundreds of people - worldwide. And these people cannot agree on a coherent message that has any actionable content. You all want "the truth", "a new investigation", but your 530 signers could never ever agree on what a new investigation should concentrate on. Waste millions on collapse mechanics, eh?
Is fat fuck Gold still wasting his pathetic existence on the twoofy twoof?
considering I'm the only one really promoting it.
That's not what you said here.
"If a person says A and the same person says B, both A and B can not be correct." -- Jon Gold
Offtopic -- weird story here, and the Facebook posts that got him in trouble. Sounds like he was arrested to get him some psych eval rather than charge him with anything.
Kevin Barrett's silence on the issue is most uncharacteristic. He must be mellowing in his old age.
Cindy, 911blogger.com, 911truth.org, and a few other sites posted the statement on their websites. Cindy played a commercial I put together on her radio show. However, the majority of the "mainstream 9/11 Truth Movement" is not sharing it, or signing it. That is what I mean by saying "I'm the only one really promoting it." However, 9/11 Whistleblower Coleen Rowley posted it on her Facebook page, and several other people have posted it as well.
However, the majority of the "mainstream 9/11 Truth Movement" is not sharing it, or signing it.
You said it. I didn't.
What can ya do?
What can ya do?
Repackage the info. Opening with "we were lied to about 9/11" makes people tune out, because they're expecting holograms and fake phone calls. Try opening with "the Saudi government helped carry out 9/11". That's startling and important.
If you want to read a good pissing match head over to Veterans Today...Uncle Fetzer is having a go with the Judy Wood crowd. fun to watch scavengers tried to eat each other...
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/08/20/judy-wood-and-dews-the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly/comment-page-1/#comment-448882
@ Jon "the majority of the "mainstream 9/11 Truth Movement" is not sharing it, or signing it."
You imagined it would go viral. It doesn't. Neither the 9/11 TM mainstream, nor the 9/11 TM fringe (that's a fringe of the fringe) are spreading it.
See, that's what I meant when I said "you are out of touch with reality".
Why are they not spreading it? Because there is no large Truth Movement. It is a fringy assortment of nuts. And you, Jon, for all your commendable values and enthusiasm, are one of them. You share their main trait: You are out of touch with reality. This big sinister inside job, this conspiracy to harm America and escape responsibility - it does not exist. Not in any way that you could even describe in one coherent paragraph.
You need to realize: the 9/11 TM mainstream is your worst enemy. They are the best reason why your project must fail. You must fight them first. You must gather those with the right instinct and put as much distance between yourselves and the TM mainstream as possible.
The problems America and the world are facing have NOTHING to with who made or let 9/11 happen and why. The problem is still, and always has been, since long before 9/11, that America - the huge majority of Americans - as well as the rest of the world is eager to trade some moral high ground for some more wealth and coziness. Your leaders are not working against the people when they make strange bedfellows and questionable enemies in the Middle East - they are doing exactly what America wants from them: Sacrifice a few - mostly dark-eyed - existances for stable gas prices.
A big problem lies in Saudi Arabia - and you can bet these problems have long since been dealt with. You can bet that enough AQ supporters have been killed to chop off that connection.
If your political vision wins the day, if you manage to put the blame where it belongs, you win some enemies back that you don't want to have.
I know, Dystopia. Not exactly satisfying. But Utopias, too, have never worked.
@ RGT: "Repackage the info. Opening with "we were lied to about 9/11" makes people tune out, because they're expecting holograms and fake phone calls. Try opening with "the Saudi government helped carry out 9/11". That's startling and important."
Why? It's not true. "The" Saudi government did no such thing. Rogue elements with ties to the Royal family, yes, probably.
The real problem are the wars, and whatever the Bush administrations did unrelated to but still branded as a consequence of 9/11. The abuse of a once-in-a-lifetime emergency as an opportunity to box through unpopular ideology.
Oh, yes, and some arses have been covered that perhaps out to have been slapped.
I don't know what the message ought to be. Seems like Jon, too, doesn't know, 11 years later. All that mythical hope that a big general new investigation will magically enlighten the world and deliver redemption upon the world.
@ jon gold "Daniele Ganser just signed it."
Isn't Ganser another CD nut? Distracting the gullible and fools from the real problems? Are you happy this nutbar signed?
Why? It's not true. "The" Saudi government did no such thing.
But pretend you're Jon (who thinks it is true). It turns our understanding of 9/11 upside down. It's provable (ask jimd3100 for links). It's more plausible than fake phone calls. It's easier to understand than iron microspheres. Most important -- it gives us a new route to justice, by punishing the Saudis who helped al Qaeda and the Americans who helped the Saudis.
Wouldn't it make more sense to grab a listener's attention with that bombshell, than to trigger their bozo-reflex with a generic conspiracy line?
Rogue elements with ties to the Royal family, yes, probably.
Or even more mundane, individuals accustomed to handing out money but unaccustomed to asking hard questions about where it's going.
Rogue elements in the government like the Chief of Saudi Security (and later ambassador to the USA) Prince Turki al Faisal, who reportedly met with bin Laden in a Dubai hospital two months before 9/11.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/nov/01/afghanistan.terrorism
Do you ever shut the fuck up, troll?
Get out of here sex predator.
Make me, liar.
"Liar"?
That's hilarious coming from a psychopath, "miserable troll," disgusting sex predator and proven compulsive liar.
Go for it, shit-for-brains! Spam the thread with non-sequiturs and bald-faced lies to your black heart's content. The only "reputation" you've managed to thrash is your own.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Good work, ButtGale. Hijacking the thread and linking to a site of which Google warns: "Of the 2 pages we tested on the site over the past 90 days, 2 page(s) resulted in malicious software being downloaded and installed without user consent. The last time Google visited this site was on 2012-08-16, and the last time suspicious content was found on this site was on 2012-08-16."
But you knew that, right?
Of the 2 pages we tested on the site over the past 90 days, 2 page(s) resulted in malicious software being downloaded and installed without user consent.
You can ignore that. Go ahead and click.
"Oystein" said:
"Why? It's not true. "The" Saudi government did no such thing. Rogue elements with ties to the Royal family, yes, probably."
Hey nerd, I found another petition for you to troll.
http://truthaction.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=51215
http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/o/6527/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=2370
Another link for "Oystein", the supercilious, socially awkward, petition graphing no-lifer:
http://truthaction.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=51194#51194
Will you join Pat Curley in calling for the release of the "28 pages"?
Don't be a killjoy.
"Isn't Ganser another CD nut?"
Have you read any of his works? Can you point to anything he gets wrong? Maybe when you're taking a break from all your other "research"...
Scum.bag lies, "...But you knew that, right?"
Yes, I know for a fact that you've poisoned Web of Trust (WOT) and Google's security database with false reports of malicious software. RGT's comment proves that the reports are false.
As a result, I've reported your criminal activity to WOT, Google and the FBI.
Have a nice day, cyber criminal.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Will you join Pat Curley in calling for the release of the "28 pages"?
de Boerenlul, you really are an idiot aren't you? Nobody at SLC has ever -- at any time -- opposed the release of the redacted pages. Most of us simply don't buy Dorman's half-baked theory of intentional Saudi involvement in the attacks.
Your writing is very articulate and uses big words but Jesus Christ, you miss a lot.
"Rogue elements in the government like the Chief of Saudi Security (and later ambassador to the USA) Prince Turki al Faisal, who reportedly met with bin Laden in a Dubai hospital two months before 9/11.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/nov/01/afghanistan.terrorism"
Once again you post a link to an ancient story which has since been shown to be a lie. The story itself is riddled with untruths such as this gem:
"Bin Laden has often been reported to be in poor health. Some accounts claim that he is suffering from Hepatitis C, and can expect to live for only two more years.
According to Le Figaro, last year he ordered a mobile dialysis machine to be delivered to his base at Kandahar in Afghanistan."
Guess what the SEALs didn't find at his house. Guess who didn't die of kidney failure.
Then there's this:
"Whether the allegations about the Dubai meeting are confirmed or not, the wider leaks from the French secret service throw a worrying light on the rivalries and lack of coordination between intelligence agencies, both within the US and between western allies."
All you need to know about the background of this story.
None of the information was ever verified by the French.
MGF is such a cynic that he thinks goverments can be expected to lie to cover their own asses--but when they tell him what he wants to hear, he believes them. So it's selective cynicism.
Did it not occur to you that maybe if there was no dialysis machine at his house, maybe that wasn't bin Laden they killed?
Your claim that Le Figaro's story was shown to be a lie is a lie.
@ SnowCrash "Hey nerd, I found another petition for you to troll.
http://truthaction.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=51215"
Michiel, if you want to talk with me about stuff you post at truthaction.org, unban me at truthaction.org. Or shut the fuck up. Why do you switch off your brain and cease all critical capacities the moment someone says or does something truthy?
"http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/o/6527/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=2370"
Pathetic petition. Anyone can sign this repeatedly with any fake name. Yesterday, two distinguished gentlemen signed as # 1628 and 1629: Santa Claus and Rudolph Reindeer. Yup, that was me. Unfortunately, you can't view a list of signers. What a stupidly devised petition!
@ SnowCrash "Another link for Oystein:
http://truthaction.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=51194#51194
Will you join Pat Curley in calling for the release of the "28 pages"?
Don't be a killjoy"
a) Why the need to insult? Generally speaking, what do you think about insults - do they inform you more about the insulted, or the insulter?
b) If you want to talk to me about things at truthaction.org, unban me at truthaction.org
c) Sure - where can I sign? Where have YOU called for the release?
@ caterina "Have you read any of his works? Can you point to anything he gets wrong? Maybe when you're taking a break from all your other "research"..."
Oh, no, I haven't read any of hiw works. Someone recently pointed me to a lengthy youtube presentation of his. I got to the point where he showed his 8 or 10 or so agenda bullets. They contained some of the usual crap topics such as WTC7 and Northwoods. I don't know if he actually believes that WTC7 and Northwoods are "evidence" for any "inside job" on 9/11 - that's why I didn't state that Gander is a CD nut, I asked if he is one.
You could have answered that: Is he a CD believer, yes or no, caterina?
MGF is such a cynic that he thinks goverments can be expected to lie to cover their own asses--but when they tell him what he wants to hear, he believes them. So it's selective cynicism.
Did it not occur to you that maybe if there was no dialysis machine at his house, maybe that wasn't bin Laden they killed?
Your claim that Le Figaro's story was shown to be a lie is a lie.
Great to have you back, Brian. It's always fun to read the paranoid lunatic babbling of a failed janitor who believes in modified attack baboons. Every so often, you let your guard down and tell us what you really think (that the WTC towers had explosives built into them, that the US is going to invade Canada any day now, that you could have escaped from the WTC by using a makeshift parachute or breaking through the floors), so the magic bin Laden hologram is a good addition to this.
Also, Brian, I'd like to remind you that you have already conceded that 9/11 truth has been a failure, that the "widows" will never have their questions answered, that there will never be a new investigation, and that "meatball on a fork" will never be published, so I'm a little mystified by your continued posting here.
If you accept that 9/11 truth has failed, why keep babbling about it?
This comment has been removed by the author.
>Ian, like Guitar Bill and MGF and Oystein, you just make stuff up. You live in a fantasy world.
9/11 Truth has not failed. As of 6 years ago polls showed that 85% of the American people believed that the government was hiding something, and that tens of millions thought the government allowed the attacks to happen--or worse.
It is the business of historians to find the truth, and historians in the future inevitably will examine the many anomalies in the official story. The cynicism of people like you and George Bush who think obscuring the truth for out immediate times is enough is pathetic. Don't you care how you will look in the future?
It is the business of scientists to find the truth, and structural experts in the future will inevitably examine the many unexplained aspects of the destruction of the buildings at Ground Zero. Your belief that it's all over and done with now is silly.
Y'all try to litigate away the fact that the official reports have big holes in them, and that much of them is based on very doubtful information (such as CIA transcripts of the alleged testimony of prisoners who have been tortured).
You try to do that by obscuring the undeniable facts with laughable ad hominems and jokey straw man arguments. It doesn't change the facts, and you only make yourselves look stupid and ignorant and juvenile.
"Oh, no, I haven't read any of hiw works." -Annoystein
That's quite obvious.
"the usual crap topics such as WTC7..." -Annoystein
How do you define a 'crap topic', Boystein? Is it anything that you've consistently failed to "debunk", or something you won't even try to "debunk" because you'll fail as badly as Pat?
Please explain.
Brian, we're not talking about 9/11 truth anymore because you've conceded that it failed. There's nothing left to talk about with regard to 9/11 truth.
However, your homosexual lust for Kevin Barrett is worth discussing. He's a successful academic who is unlikely to be interested in a worthless liar like you, so maybe you should stop stalking him all over the internet.
This comment has been removed by the author.
This comment has been removed by the author.
See? If you give me enough rope I'll hang myself.
Well, I'm fucked. Will you write me in prison, or will you leave me to rot while I live out the remainder of my wasted life as a dick ornament that's attached to a 6'8" gang banger thug named Dre?
And remember, prison rape is a bit like prostate cancer, it all begins with a bad cell and before you know it, your asshole is in tatters.
My motto: Internet--the final frontier. The gobbledegook you're about to read are the lies and obsessions of Brian "sex stalker for 9/11 troof" Good. My ten-year mission: to explore new methods of deception; to seek out and formulate new logical fallacies; to boldly go where no Internet troll has gone before.
Question: What's brown and bounces up and down in a baby's crib?
Answer: Pat Cowardly's ass.
Man I'm on fire taoday!
Question: In Pat Cowardly's opinion, what's the best part of being a pedophile?
Answer: Those small hands make his cock look bigger.
My motto: Internet--the final frontier. The gobbledegook you're about to read are the lies and obsessions of Brian "sex stalker for 9/11 troof" Good. My ten-year mission: to explore new methods of deception; to seek out and formulate new logical fallacies; to boldly go where no Internet troll has gone before.
Oystein said:
"that's why I didn't state that Gander is a CD nut, I asked if he is one."
How about you get his name right first, Sherlock.
You're going to stay banned. Just because. :)
Ian wrote: you've conceded that [9/11Truth] failed.
I never said any such thing. 9/11 Truth is an abstraction. IT belongs to the ages.
Ian wrote: There's nothing left to talk about with regard to 9/11 truth.
There's plenty more to talk about.
The widows' 273 unanswered questions, for starters. The many holes in the 9/11 Commission Report and the NIST report.
Ian wrote: [Kevin Barrett] is . . . . a successful academic.
Kevin Barrett was a part-time lecturer. After demonstrating his lack of ethical sense in publishing confidential emails, his attention-seeking behaviors, his lousy scholarship in published works, his lies on Russia Today, and his blatant bigotry against Jews, Barrett will never have an academic position, anywhere. And if you had the MBA you claim you would know that.
Brian, you have already conceded that 9/11 truth has failed and that the widows will never have their questions answered and that there will never be a new investigation. Just look at the previous thread.
So we're not going to talk about 9/11 truth anymore. It's over.
Kevin Barrett was a part-time lecturer. After demonstrating his lack of ethical sense in publishing confidential emails, his attention-seeking behaviors, his lousy scholarship in published works, his lies on Russia Today, and his blatant bigotry against Jews, Barrett will never have an academic position, anywhere.
And you have an uncontrollable homosexual lust for the man, which is why you can't stop stalking him. Barrett says you want him to whip you while you wear a ballerina's outfit.
And if you had the MBA you claim you would know that.
I do have an MBA, which is why I know that you're an unemployed janitor who failed out of San Jose State.
Oystein -- the behavior you're witnessing from Snowcrash is not uncommon. I've seen this weird, passive-aggressive anti-German sentiment among young Dutch pseudointellectuals before.
One nut I used to work with had an elaborate theory involving Hitler, the Merovingians, the Dutch royal family, and this monument (the details of which escape me at the moment).
...and Oystein runs away like Pat the Coward. Again.
Addressing wtc7 tends to do that.
Sure Brian, and Jesus is coming back too. Then everyone will see "the truth"!
Over 150 million people believe in angels...who cares?
I think everyone can agree there were people in "the government" who were not honest, and would most likely point in the Bush administration's direction. That in no way has any bearing on the 9/11 CR, NIST, FEMA, or the couple dozen peer reviewed studies on the subject.
But that's not what you want people to believe. You like the rest of the irrelevance want people to accept stupid association fallacies.
GMS, the 9/11 CR was based to a disturbing extent on classified allegations the citizens are mnot allowed to see. Its central narrative is based on hearsay testimony of admittedly tortured prisoners written up by the CIA.
The NIST report is incomplete. It cut off its analysis at the point of collapse initiation and thus dodges all the essential mysteries of what happened to the buildings on 9/11.
Ian, your fantasies are strictly NWOR.
SpamMasterDreck pops in for a drive-by non-debunking again, and flees to avoid deeper discussion.
Quelle surprise!
GMS, the 9/11 CR was based to a disturbing extent on classified allegations the citizens are mnot allowed to see. Its central narrative is based on hearsay testimony of admittedly tortured prisoners written up by the CIA.
The NIST report is incomplete. It cut off its analysis at the point of collapse initiation and thus dodges all the essential mysteries of what happened to the buildings on 9/11.
Brian, we're not talking about 9/11 truth anymore. You've already admitted that it has failed and that there will never be a new investigation, remember?
Instead, we should talk about the fact that you're an unemployed janitor who lives with his parents.
Ian wrote, "...Instead, we should talk about the fact that you're an unemployed janitor who lives with his parents."
I agree, Ian, this is an excellent topic.
We could also discuss the twisted psychological make up of a bisexual sex predator who stalks William Rodriguez, Kevin Barrett and Carol Brouillet.
Or we could discuss the futility of trying to prove that an industrial-strength idiot like Brian Good is an idiot. After all, proving an idiot is an idiot to an idiot like Brian Good’s satisfaction is difficult because idiot’s tend not to believe evidence--that’s why they’re idiots.
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
(NOTE: Pay no attention to the "this website could harm your computer" verbiage. The website will NOT harm your computer. Bear in mind that Brian Good deliberately poisoned WOT and Google's malicious website database.)
> Pay no attention to the "this website could harm your computer" verbiage. The website will NOT harm your computer.
Right. Pay no attention to google's posted warning: "Of the 2 pages we tested on the site over the past 90 days, 2 page(s) resulted in malicious software being downloaded and installed without user consent."
Pay attention instead to the assurances of a pseudonymous internet liar.
Right, that's why RGT said ignore the message, too.
Face it, goat fucker, no one believes a word that emanates from your semen-encrusted keyboard. Even the troofers refer to you as a "miserable troll." Now get your liver-spotted hand's off the keyboard and drink a 500 ml flask of ammonium nitrate. Live a little, pervert.
Loser.
And remember, scum.bag, all you deserve is ridicule.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
(NOTE: Pay no attention to the "this website could harm your computer" verbiage. The website will NOT harm your computer. Bear in mind that Brian Good deliberately poisoned WOT and Google's malicious website database.)
Anyway, Brian, since we're not talking about 9/11 anymore, we should talk about other things.
Do you ever plan on accepting Willie Rodriguez' debate challenge? Last time we checked, you had run away squealing and crying from him.
I didn't run away. I demanded a responsibly-moderated debate because Willie's rather unheroic tendency to employ human shields made me fear that the interests of innocent third parties might be harmed.
Pat and/or James bent over backwards to show that they would not be responsible moderators. I tried to find another venue, and Willie would not lift a finger to help.
I didn't run away. I demanded a responsibly-moderated debate because Willie's rather unheroic tendency to employ human shields made me fear that the interests of innocent third parties might be harmed.
Thanks for proving my point. You ran away squealing and crying like the liar and coward that you are.
Pat and/or James bent over backwards to show that they would not be responsible moderators. I tried to find another venue, and Willie would not lift a finger to help.
Squeal squeal squeal!
Poor Brian. He's hysterical because I've humiliated him again about his cowardly refusal to debate Willie Rodriguez.
@ Pat Cowardly ""the usual crap topics such as WTC7..." -Oystein
How do you define a 'crap topic', Oystein? Is it anything that you've consistently failed to "debunk", or something you won't even try to "debunk" because you'll fail as badly as Pat?
Please explain."
1. I edited out yourvery childish insults to protect possible remnants of your respectability
2. There is nothing to debunk about WTC7, that's why it's a crap topic
3. It doesn't matter what you or I or we think about WTC7 in the current context. To remind you: The current context is that Daniele Ganser signed Jon Gold's petition, and I asked if Ganser is a CD proponent. I rest my assumption that he is on the fact that he a) is a Twoofer and b) presents WTC7 as a major Twoof topic. So is he a CD proponent, yes or no? This is relevant within the thread topic, as Jon Gold doesn't like the detractors within the TM who are pushing CD, which he considers a failed meme.
@ SnowCrash ""that's why I didn't state that Gander is a CD nut, I asked if he is one."
How about you get his name right first, Sherlock."
Identify the location of the letters "s" and "d" on a Dutch, German or American computer key board, then ask yourself:
1. "Am I really this childish?"
2. "Did I just dodge the question whether or not "Gander" is a CD nut?
3. "Did I really think I'd get away with that crap?"
"You're going to stay banned. Just because. :)"
Alright, so you don't just practice censorship, you practice it consciosly with a dictator's arbitrariness :)
This is perhaps why I am fighting you Twoofer types: Your chance of marching on to power is negligible, but if you get there, you will be dangerous to my freedoms and rights. You are exactly the type of fascist monster that you feign to agitate against.
@ RGT "Oystein -- the behavior you're witnessing from Snowcrash is not uncommon. I've seen this weird, passive-aggressive anti-German sentiment among young Dutch pseudointellectuals before. "
I don't think this is a case of nationalistic hatred. Folks from other nations, inculding ones with which no Dutch should have any beef, have described him to me as an erratic, pompous, fundamentally unfair asshole ;)
# 561 on Jon's petition is Niels Harrit, the über-CD nut. Wonder if Jon will let him stay and give his statement a bad name...
"There is nothing to debunk about WTC7, that's why it's a crap topic"
So Oystein:
1. Believes that NIST's wtc 7 simulation matches the video evidence.
2. Agrees with Pat the the microspheres from cutting torches are indistinguishable from those found in fly ash, and equally indistinguishable from those found in thermitic residues. No one can tell them apart.
3. Believes that the failure of 1 column will cause 81 other columns to fail within seconds of each other.
4. Believes he can tell us what the spheres and the chips are, despite never having seen or worked with any samples whatsoever.
5. Always uses the word "thermite" to avoid talking about any other possible energetic nanocomposite formulations.
Your failed attempts to "debunk" the serious questions about 9/11 are transparently obvious to honest researchers. Why do you persist, Casstein?
Cowardly, where did you get the idea that questions are "evidence"?
Did the idiot goat fucker tell you that?
Question: How does Pat Cowardly keep the neighbor's kids off his lawn?
Answer: He molests them.
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
(NOTE: Pay no attention to the "this website could harm your computer" verbiage. The website will NOT harm your computer. Bear in mind that Brian Good deliberately poisoned WOT and Google's malicious website database.)
ButtGale, as always you make claims for which you can provide no evidence. It must be very frustrating for you that nobody believes you.
And Trollstein disappears yet again. He must be comparing "research" with Pat, to see if their contradictory "debunking" tropes can somehow be reconciled. But they can't, and they know it.
...and they claim to be interested in the facts...we might as well all them Cassly and Soynnstein.
Scum.bag compulsive liar for 9/11 troof squeals, "...as always you make claims for which you can provide no evidence. It must be very frustrating for you that nobody believes you."
What's this, ass?
"...Your failed attempts to "debunk" the serious questions about 9/11 are transparently obvious to honest researchers. Why do you persist, Casstein?" -- Ali the molester
So what were you saying, ass?
So what's your excuse, Mr. Bogus "scientific reputation"?
Oh, that's right! You can't read, you can't do math, you know nothing about physics, and you can't pass a formal examination in elementary logic. What's new? Same shit, different day.
Tell us more about ΔT, charlatan. And when you're finished perhaps you can try once again to convince us that acceleration is velocity.
Jackass.
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
(NOTE: Pay no attention to the "this website could harm your computer" verbiage. The website will NOT harm your computer. Bear in mind that Brian Good deliberately poisoned WOT and Google's malicious website database.)
The goat fucker squeals, "...It must be very frustrating for you that nobody believes you."
Yes, goat fucker, you ARE nobody.
After all, you're 60 years old and you live with your mommy. You have no career, no friends and no love life.
Yep, you're nobody alright.
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
(NOTE: Pay no attention to the "this website could harm your computer" verbiage. The website will NOT harm your computer. Bear in mind that Brian Good deliberately poisoned WOT and Google's malicious website database.)
Keep up that "debunking", GoiterBalls. Oystein is clearly amazed at your skills.
Aren't you, Soynnstein?
hellooooo?
So tell us Ali the molester, why do you deliberately conflate questions as "evidence"?
Fuckin' idiot, aren't you?
Question: What does Pat Cowardly get when he cuts a 3 year old?
Answer: A hard on.
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
(NOTE: Pay no attention to the "this website could harm your computer" verbiage. The website will NOT harm your computer. Bear in mind that Brian Good deliberately poisoned WOT and Google's malicious website database.)
GutterBunk,
Where do you get you information about my age, my residence, and my love life? Have you been stalking me? No? How do you know?
This comment has been removed by the author.
Scum.bag whines, "...Where do you get you information about my age, my residence, and my love life? Have you been stalking me? No? How do you know?"
Because you were outed by William Rodriguez and Carol Brouillet.
What's this, Mr. Compulsive Liar?
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
And if the information found therein isn't true, why did you commit a crime and deliberately poison WOT and Google's malicious website database?
You lie just to keep in practice don't you, Lothario?
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
(NOTE: Pay no attention to the "this website could harm your computer" verbiage. The website will NOT harm your computer. Bear in mind that Brian Good deliberately poisoned WOT and Google's malicious website database.)
Ali the molester whines, "...Oystein is clearly amazed at your skills."
Oystein reads about as well you, Ali. And that's precisely why I don't give a damn about your idiotic opinion.
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
(NOTE: Pay no attention to the "this website could harm your computer" verbiage. The website will NOT harm your computer. Bear in mind that Brian Good deliberately poisoned WOT and Google's malicious website database.)
Anybody else notice the subtle change in Cowardly's fixation? A year ago, he told us the RJ Lee report confirmed microspheres from thermite. Then the Millette report shut him up for a while. Now this weird idea about distinguishing fly ash microspheres from thermite microspheres (but no sources indicating it's possible, or even what it might mean if possible).
That's the beauty of their con game, RGT.
They never present evidence to substantiate their insanity. This explains why scum.bag and Ali the Molester constantly conflate questions with "evidence."
Should we expect less from a pair of con men? Probably not.
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
(NOTE: Pay no attention to the "this website could harm your computer" verbiage. The website will NOT harm your computer. Bear in mind that Brian Good deliberately poisoned WOT and Google's malicious website database.)
I'm sure it's mysterious to idiots like you, RGT, but I can assure you that Pat is following just fine. Why don't you ask him for help?
Oh, and why can't you tell us what volatilized the lead while you're at it? What temperature is needed for that? how about the melted molybdenum?
Sunstein--...er... Oystein?
@ Cowardly: "1. ... NIST's wtc 7 simulation...
2. ... microspheres
3. ... failure of 1 column will cause 81 other columns to fail ...
4. ... what the spheres and the chips are ...
5. ... any other possible energetic nanocomposite formulations.
"
*yawn*
1. Is irrelevant, appeal to perfection logical fallacy. Nothing to debunk.
2. There is no evidence based connection, nor any consistent, complete and coherent theory, that links microspheres and WTC7. Nothing to debunk.
3. By the time the first column failed, many floors and girders had failed and left many other columns unbraced. So yes, why not. Argument from incredulity logical fallacy. Nothing to debunk.
4. Spheres are common in all sorts of ashes, paint chips are definitly paint on steel scales. Proven to not be thermite at all. No conenction between chips and WTC7 at all. Nothing to debunk.
5. But Jones, Harrit, Ryan, Legge, Gage etc. claim thermite. It is not thermite at all. No other theory, or evidence for it, exists. No conenction between chips and WTC7 at all. Nothing to debunk.
FAIL.
Still nothing to debunk.
Oh, and why can't you tell us what volatilized the lead while you're at it? What temperature is needed for that? how about the melted molybdenum?
Your autistic fixation on the microscopic is tedious. Science or GTFO, boy.
PAThetic dodges noted, Soynstein.
1. Now NIST is irrelevant because their model isn't supposed to match reality? Amazing analysis, annoystein.
2. Dodging the question about the differences among microspheres, just like Pat always has. Laughable.
3. Now a coherent theory is necessary, even when your beliefs have been proven completely false? pathetic.
4. you never proved this, no matter how many times you say it.
5. Why do you keep playing dumb? harrit et al. have mentioned many different nanoenergetic possibilities, but not you, for some reason. Why is that? How much do you know about nanoenergetic formulations? why don't you share the info with us?
Like I said: your tactics are completely transparent, and I enjoy making a fool of you for all to see. Keep posting here. You and Pat can look stupid together. he could use the company.
Brian, given your sexual perversions and the circumstances that led to your being banned from wikipedia, has McKayla Maroney put a restraining order on you yet?
Just curious.
UtterFool, William Rodriguez is a blatant liar, Carol Brouillet did not say what you claim she says, and your belief is ludicrous that a) I poisoned WOT and b) there's some connection between your false accusation that I did and the truth of the information on Barrett's page.
RGT, what is unreasonable about the prospect of distinguishing between thermitic microspheres from fly ash microspheres? The only thing unreasonable about it I can see is that there is no evidence that fly ash was used in the lightweight concrete at the WTC.
PC, I think the volatilized lead could have been formed by electrical arcing. The wire ends of electrical fixtures are commonly "tinned" with solder. As for the molybdenum sphere, it could be of geological origin and simply present as an impurity in the concrete.
Oystein, there's plenty to debunk about NIST's WTC7 sims. They bear no relation to what actually happened. Also, they were cut off in time so we wouldn't see how chaotic they got in the later stages.
Oystein said: "By the time the first column failed, many floors and girders had failed and left many other columns unbraced."
That's ridiculous. Of the 21 columns that were standing when the first rank of 3 failed, 18 were braced on 4 sides and 3 were braced on 3 sides.
>Spheres are common in all sorts of ashes
Prove it.
>paint chips are definitly paint on steel scales. Proven to not be thermite
It doesn't bother you that Dr. Millette's findings have not been reproduced by anyone? I guess not. All aboard the Confirmation Bias Express! Good luck with that.
"...William Rodriguez is a blatant liar"
Says the proven compulsive liar.
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
"...Carol Brouillet did not say what you claim she says"
Says the proven compulsive liar.
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
"...and your belief is ludicrous that a) I poisoned WOT and b) there's some connection between your false accusation that I did and the truth of the information on Barrett's page."
Says the proven compulsive liar.
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
Any more non-sequiturs for us, jackass?
So tell us more about ΔT, charlatan. And when you're finished perhaps you can try once again to convince us that acceleration is velocity.
Jackass.
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
(NOTE: Pay no attention to the "this website could harm your computer" verbiage. The website will NOT harm your computer. Bear in mind that Brian Good deliberately poisoned WOT and Google's malicious website database.)
RGT, what is unreasonable about the prospect of distinguishing between thermitic microspheres from fly ash microspheres?
The prospect is reasonable. Presenting a mere prospect as evidence is not.
Look! Now the droolin' idiot, Pat Cowardly, has moved on from the "questions are evidence" fallacy to the goat fucker's favorite "non-sequiturs are evidence" fallacy.
Should we expect less from a pair of con men? Probably not.
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
(NOTE: Pay no attention to the "this website could harm your computer" verbiage. The website will NOT harm your computer. Bear in mind that Brian Good deliberately poisoned WOT and Google's malicious website database.)
"...Prove it."
I've already proven "it" on dozens of occasions. That a pervert, con man and proven compulsive liar refuses to accept the truth is beyond irrelevant.
Recall that proving an idiot is an idiot to an idiot like Brian Good’s satisfaction is difficult because idiot’s tend not to believe evidence--that’s why they’re idiots.
Idiot.
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
(NOTE: Pay no attention to the "this website could harm your computer" verbiage. The website will NOT harm your computer. Bear in mind that Brian Good deliberately poisoned WOT and Google's malicious website database.)
UtterFail I have not lied, and you can't show a time when I did. Your obsession with a simple concept like ΔT only makes you look silly. I never said acceleration is velocity.
When have you proven that microspheres are present in all sorts of fires?
RGT, how would differences between thermitic microspheres and fly ash microspheres not be evidence?
"...I have not lied, and you can't show a time when I did."
Bullshit! I've caught you lying so many times it's disgusting. That's why no one--including the troofers who refer to you as a "miserable troll"--believes a word that emanates from your semen-encrusted keyboard.
Furthermore asshole, I visit Barrett's website practically every day. My computer's anti-viral suite has an integrated heuristics detection engine. The heuristics detection engine can detect even the latest viruses and malware (so-called "zero-day wares"). In all the years that I've read Barrett's website, not one of my computer's have EVER been attacked as a result of visiting his website.
That's why RGT's computer was not attacked when he pointed his web browser at Barrett's website. Barrett's website simply isn't a "malicious attack" website.
There's only one logical explanation for this situation: YOU made false reports to Google and WOT.
You have the means, the method and, above all, the MOTIVE.
"...I never said acceleration is velocity."
Bullshit! You made the claim when you tried to pull off one of your idiotic straw man attacks on WhyAskQuestions.
You lie just to keep in practice, scum.bag.
"... Your obsession with a simple concept like ΔT only makes you look silly."
Right! Tell us more about your "scientific reputation," while you can't explain a simple concept like ΔT--which is high school-level Chemistry.
You're a jackass, a pervert and a liar.
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
(NOTE: Pay no attention to the "this website could harm your computer" verbiage. The website will NOT harm your computer. Bear in mind that Brian Good deliberately poisoned WOT and Google's malicious website database.)
"Did it not occur to you that maybe if there was no dialysis machine at his house, maybe that wasn't bin Laden they killed?"
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Brian Goode - retard.
Here's Brian considering the idea of fake passengers on Flight 77:
"Has anyoneever bothered to independently confirm that these passengers actually exist? Or do we assume from a list of names on the AA computer and perhaps a couple of TV interviews with tearful widows that they are all real?"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=46558&mesg_id=47584
This comment has been removed by the author.
UtterFail, thanks for proving my point. You can not demonstrate one time when I lied. You can not demonstrate that I said that acceleration and velocity were the same thing.
As to Barrett's website, let's see: Google claims that his site installs malware. A lying anonymous internet poster claims it doesn't. Gosh, who should I trust?
Your conclusion, based on no evidence whatsoever, that I must have lied to Google is typical of your crippled epistemology. Also your belief in the significance of the trivial ΔT--which even Ian could google in two minutes.
MGF, do you believe "HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!" is a rational argument?
MR, you provide no evidence that petgoat has anything to do with me.
"...thanks for proving my point. You can not demonstrate one time when I lied. You can not demonstrate that I said that acceleration and velocity were the same thing."
Of course I can demonstrate that you're a liar. Why do you think you're widely perceived as a liar? And who exposed you as a liar?
The answer: Me.
"...As to Barrett's website, let's see: Google claims that his site installs malware. A lying anonymous internet poster claims it doesn't. Gosh, who should I trust?"
There's only one problem, Pinocchio: Barrett's website doesn't install malware. That's why RGT said to ignore the warning. That's why my computer's have never been attacked by Barrett's website. That's why NOT ONE PERSON who clicked on the link has ever come back to complain that the website installs malware.
See? I just proved once again that you're a liar.
"...Also your belief in the significance of the trivial ΔT--which even Ian could google in two minutes."
Then why couldn't you answer the question? Why were you unable to give an answer UNTIL I GAVE YOU THE ANSWER?
Answer: You lied when you claimed to have a "scientific reputation."
See? I just proved once again that you're a liar.
Now lie to us again--you lying, scum sucking homosexual degenerate.
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
(NOTE: Pay no attention to the "this website could harm your computer" verbiage. The website will NOT harm your computer. Bear in mind that Brian Good deliberately poisoned WOT and Google's malicious website database.)
UtterFail, the correct answer to Q: Please demonstrate a time when I lied is not
A: Who demonstrated that you lied? Me!
All you're demonstrating is your woeful illogic. It's no surprise that your obsolete cookbook education has served you poorly and you are now unemployable.
Google says this about Barrett's site:
Of the 2 pages we tested on the site over the past 90 days, 2 page(s) resulted in malicious software being downloaded and installed without user consent. The last time Google visited this site was on 2012-08-16, and the last time suspicious content was found on this site was on 2012-08-16.
Malicious software includes 2 exploit(s).
Malicious software is hosted on 2 domain(s), including centerpointe.com/, trustprograms.info/.
1 domain(s) appear to be functioning as intermediaries for distributing malware to visitors of this site, including centerpointe.com/.
This site was hosted on 1 network(s) including AS8560 (SCHLUND).
http://safebrowsing.clients.google.com/safebrowsing/diagnostic?client=Firefox&hl=en-US&site=http://www.truthjihad.com/good.htm
Your belief that I didn't answer your stupid question because I didn't know the answer is absurd.
I didn't answer it because I knew that would provoke you into making a fool of yourself.
I don't care what Google says, ass wipe. First of all, Google doesn't tell us what kind of malware is allegedly installed. Malware and viruses have NAMES. Why can't they give us the malwares name?
The answer is simple: The website doesn't install malware. Google blacklisted the website based on false information. False information THAT YOU GAVE THEM.
Why has no one who clicked on the link complained that the website installs malware? Are you seriously trying to suggest that somehow no one who visits SLC and clicked on the link was affected by the alleged "malware"?
Why did RGT find no malware?
The answer is simple: Barrett's website simply doesn't install malware.
See? You're a liar.
You lied about Barrett's website. You lied about your alleged "scientific reputation." You lied about your straw man attack on WhyAskQuestion wherein you claimed that acceleration is velocity.
You lie first, last and always.
Should we expect less from a lying homosexual degenerate? Probably not.
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
(NOTE: Pay no attention to the "this website could harm your computer" verbiage. The website will NOT harm your computer. Bear in mind that Brian Good deliberately poisoned WOT and Google's malicious website database.)
If Barrett's website is a "malware attack" website, why doesn't the PREMIER malware domain list website, http://www.malwaredomainlist.com, list Barrett's website, truthjihad.com, as a malware attack website?
You wouldn't lie to us, would you, scum.bag?
Of course you'd lie to us. Should we expect less from a lying homosexual degenerate? Probably not.
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
(NOTE: Pay no attention to the "this website could harm your computer" verbiage. The website will NOT harm your computer. Bear in mind that Brian Good deliberately poisoned WOT and Google's malicious website database.)
I didn't lie about anything. You proceed by a process of circular reasoning. "We know you lie because you're a lying liar." That is completely irrational, but not surprising coming from someone such as yourself who obviously comes from an authoritarian educational tradition and never learned to think.
Google says Barrett's site installs malware. You and RGT are anonymous internet posters, and your anecdotes are poor evidence. Do you think Google lies about malware? Don't you think that would be a rather risky practice?
You provide no evidence to support your accusations. You only repeat the empty accusations. Why are you obsessed with me, UtterFail?
petgoat said...
"MR, you provide no evidence that petgoat has anything to do with me."
For starters, there's your email referring to petgoat's Democratic Undergound posts as yours.
You don't really expect us to buy your "forged email" defense, do you?
Then there's this nugget from the SF911truth mailing list:
Brian Good <snug....@hotmail.com> wrote:
Woo Hoo Dana! Great Letter!
[...]
Can I post this on DemocraticUnderground? If so, do you want your name on or off?
Brian
Who then posted the letter on Democratic Underground? Take a wild guess.
Then there were the phrases shared between you and petgoat and nobody else on the Internet, and uncanny conincidences like this.
You're petgoat. You know it. I know it. Everybody knows it.
"...Google says Barrett's site installs malware."
Complete the sentence, degenerate.
Google says Barrett's site installs malware without offering a shred of evidence to support their assertion.
Tell us more about "circular reasoning," Mr. Doesn't Know the Definition of ΔT.
Google is NOT an authority on malware attack websites. Malware Domain List IS AN AUTHORITY ON MALWARE ATTACK WEBSITES.
Answer the Goddamned question, pervert:
Why doesn't the PREMIER malware domain list website, http://www.malwaredomainlist.com, list Barrett's website, truthjihad.com, as a malware attack website?
The answer is simple: You're lying through your terracotta teeth, as always. YOU SUPPLIED FALSE INFORMATION TO GOOGLE AND WOT. AND YOU'RE GOING TO PAY--YOU MALICIOUS SCUMBAG.
See? You're a liar.
You lied about Barrett's website. You lied about your alleged "scientific reputation." You lied about your straw man attack on WhyAskQuestion wherein you claimed that acceleration is velocity.
You lie first, last and always.
Should we expect less from a lying homosexual degenerate? Probably not.
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
(NOTE: Pay no attention to the "this website could harm your computer" verbiage. The website will NOT harm your computer. Bear in mind that Brian Good deliberately poisoned WOT and Google's malicious website database.)
This comment has been removed by the author.
MY email, MR? Funny, I don't remember ever writing any emails to "xxxxxxxxx". Your belief that Willie's post represents an email from me only shows why you are so confused about Willie and a lot of things.
You're a waste of time. And note that petgoat seems to claim that the letter was forwarded to him or her "from California". That would seem to indicate that petgoat is someplace other than California, nicht wahr?
UtterFail, I didn't lie about anything. You're only demonstrating your irrationality--and malicious irrationality at that. Are you on a mission from God or something?
Jeez... I feel like the quartermaster clerk in this Austin Powers scene.
"...I didn't lie about anything. You're only demonstrating your irrationality--and malicious irrationality at that. Are you on a mission from God or something?"
That's right, goat fucker, don't answer the questions and go into PETTIFOGGING MODE.
Answer the Goddamned question, pervert:
Why doesn't the PREMIER malware domain list website, http://www.malwaredomainlist.com, list Barrett's website, truthjihad.com, as a malware attack website?
The answer is simple: You're lying through your terracotta teeth, as always. YOU SUPPLIED FALSE INFORMATION TO GOOGLE AND WOT. AND YOU'RE GOING TO PAY--YOU MALICIOUS SCUMBAG.
See? You're a liar.
You lied about Barrett's website. You lied about your alleged "scientific reputation." You lied about your straw man attack on WhyAskQuestion wherein you claimed that acceleration is velocity.
You lie first, last and always.
Should we expect less from a lying homosexual degenerate? Probably not.
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
(NOTE: Pay no attention to the "this website could harm your computer" verbiage. The website will NOT harm your computer. Bear in mind that Brian Good deliberately poisoned WOT and Google's malicious website database.)
I didn't lie about anything, and you haven't showed that I did. I said Google warned that Barrett's site installs malware. They did say that Barrett's site installs malware. You've been trying to lawyer away that fact ever since.
The fact that you think I don't have a scientific reputation shows how little you know about me.
That's right, goat fucker, don't answer the question, twist my argument beyond recognition and whatever you do PETTIFOG--you evil, lying homosexual degenerate.
Get it through your 8 foot thick, steel-reinforced concrete skull: Google is NOT an authority on malware attack websites.
http://www.malwaredomainlist.com is an AUTHORITY, and they DO NOT list Barrett's website as a malware attack website.
Why is that, piggy?
Search results from malwaredomain.com for truthjihad
Now answer the Goddamned question, pervert:
Why doesn't the PREMIER malware domain list website, http://www.malwaredomainlist.com, list Barrett's website, truthjihad.com, as a malware attack website?
The answer is simple: You're lying through your terracotta teeth, as always. YOU SUPPLIED FALSE INFORMATION TO GOOGLE AND WOT. AND YOU'RE GOING TO PAY--YOU MALICIOUS SCUMBAG.
See? You're a liar.
You lied about Barrett's website. You lied about your alleged "scientific reputation." You lied about your straw man attack on WhyAskQuestion wherein you claimed that acceleration is velocity.
You lie first, last and always.
Should we expect less from a lying homosexual degenerate? Probably not.
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
(NOTE: Pay no attention to the "this website could harm your computer" verbiage. The website will NOT harm your computer. Bear in mind that Brian Good deliberately poisoned WOT and Google's malicious website database.)
"MGF, do you believe "HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!" is a rational argument?"
In your case, yes, because you're clown.
Fact is we don't know what was found at the bin Laden compound because the details of the raid have not been released. Doesn't matter, you have shown you have no interest in facts.
UtterFail, your question is doubtless dishonestly framed, so it's pointless for me to answer.
I didn't lie about anything. Your belief in argumentum ad nauseam and proof by assertion is irrational.
So MGF, we know all about bin Laden's porn collection but we don't know about his dialysis machine? Is that what you're claiming?
In any case, no evidence of a dialysis machine has been presented. Did bin Laden get a miraculous cure?
"...your question is doubtless dishonestly framed, so it's pointless for me to answer."
That's exactly what you said when I asked you to explain the definition of ΔT. You were lying then just as you're lying now.
Now answer the Goddamned questions, pervert:
Why doesn't the PREMIER malware domain list website, http://www.malwaredomainlist.com, list Barrett's website, truthjihad.com, as a malware attack website?
Why doesn't malwaredomainlist.com list Barrett's website as a malware attack website?
Search results from malwaredomain.com for truthjihad.
The answer is simple: You're lying through your terracotta teeth, as always. YOU SUPPLIED FALSE INFORMATION TO GOOGLE AND WOT. AND YOU'RE GOING TO PAY--YOU MALICIOUS SCUMBAG.
See? You're a liar.
You lied about Barrett's website. You lied about your alleged "scientific reputation." You lied about your straw man attack on WhyAskQuestion wherein you claimed that acceleration is velocity.
You lie first, last and always.
Should we expect less from a lying homosexual degenerate? Probably not.
snug.bug said...
"And note that petgoat seems to claim that the letter was forwarded to him or her "from California". That would seem to indicate that petgoat is someplace other than California, nicht wahr? "
One, why are you talking about yourself in the third person? Two, you (as petgoat) told the DU forum that you got the letter from "a friend in California," not "from California." That in no way indicates that petgoat was someplace other than California.
Brian Good is petgoat, Exhibit #70316
On the SF911truth group, Brian Good wrote "Here are some of my Windows Media Player screen captures..." and linked to petgoat's screen captures at Democratic Underground.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
From: "Brian Good" <snug....@hotmail.com>
To: sf911truth@googlegroups.com
Subject: WTC7 Photos
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2006 12:22:11 -0700
[...]
Here are some of my Windows Media Player screen captures of frames from about the same time.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=3Dshow_mesg&forum=3D125&topic_id=3D97490&mesg_id=3D98409
http://tinyurl.com/ewjxo (alternate link)
My, what a bunch of charming guys, spending their saturday night posting about me.
MR, I've seen my stuff published in a lot of places. It's still my stuff. I saw one of my graphics published in a Danish magazine. That doesn't prove I'm a Dane. I've seen my stuff published by AE911Truth. That doesn't mean I'm Richard Gage. You really need to get a life--or at least an X-box.
Well, if it isn't 9/11 sex predator, Brian Good.
Well scum.bag, it's time for an ultimatum.
If you post one more of your filthy, lying comments to this blog, I'm going to publish Kevin Barrett's 9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked! from one end of the Internet to the other.
Rest assured, sex predator, that you'll spend the rest of your miserable life cleaning up the mess.
Are we communicating, motherfucker?
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
(NOTE: Pay no attention to the "this website could harm your computer" verbiage. The website will NOT harm your computer. Bear in mind that Brian Good deliberately poisoned WOT and Google's malicious website database.)
Is there some purpose served by your attempt to blackmail me, UtterFail?
Willie R has been trying to blackmail me since 2007 and look how well it worked out for him.
Riiiiiiiiight, Brian.
So you seem to be hinting that petgoat reposted your photos. Then where did you originally post them, and why didn't you link to that site instead?
On sf911truth, you said you were going to post Dana's letter on the Democratic Underground forum. Which user were you on that forum, if not petgoat?
Notice Brian's pathetic non-denial denials in this thread. He doesn't explicitly deny that he's petgoat, doesn't deny that he wrote the smoking-gun email, and doesn't deny that he took seriously the idea of fake plane passengers.
He wants to mislead without being caught in a blatant lie.
This comment has been removed by the author.
MR, I work with a lot of ad hoc groups. We email graphics around. We email videos around. We email pdfs and essays around. Sometimes these get passed on wider and wider--around the world. Through our contacts in these groups we can post a lot of places, and those who post can access material from a variety of sources.
I won't deny that I am Mike Rosefierce. Dig the justice of that. Now Ian and GutterBall and Willie R and Kevin Barrett can quote-mine me and claim that I admitted that you are me. I won't deny that I am Why Ask Questions. I won't deny that I am Guitar Bill, and Ian, and Richard Gage's Testicles. I will not comment on anonymous internet identities, because if I once deny that I am some nutjob, then the first time I refuse to confirm or deny will be taken as an admission.
I'm sorry the logic of this seems to escape you. Perhaps if you stuck your neck out a little bit further, you would give some serious thought to these issues. But I've never seen any indication that you ever gave any serious thought to anything.
Goat fucker, I'm not Willie--which you're about to learn the hard way.
Now, what did I just tell you? I told you very clearly that if you post one more of your filthy, lying comments to this blog, I'm going to publish Kevin Barrett's 9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked! from one end of the Internet to the other.
Well, I guess it's time to start publishing Barrett's 9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked! to every corner of the Internet.
You're such an idiot that you can't follow simple instructions. Should this outcome suprise anyone? Probably not given that you're a college dropout, disgusting sex predator, failed janitor and prolific Internet vandal.
Oh well, you made your bed and now you're going to lay in it.
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
(NOTE: Pay no attention to the "this website could harm your computer" verbiage. The website will NOT harm your computer. Bear in mind that Brian Good deliberately poisoned WOT and Google's malicious website database.)
Do you have a point? Why are you so angry? Is there some purpose served by your attempt to blackmail me, UtterFail? Willie R has been trying to blackmail me since 2007 and look how well it worked out for him.
"I will not comment on anonymous internet identities"
OK, so it's up to us to figure out that you are petgoat (and Truebeleaguer, punxsutawneybarney, etc.). Which we already did, your comedic denials (or non-denials) notwithstanding.
"That would seem to indicate that petgoat is someplace other than California, nicht wahr?"
Oh, I really think petgoat is from California. Palo Alto, to be specific.
Among the crazed meatball-on-a-fork and rake-on-rake scribbles in petgoat's "idiotbastard" Photobucket folder, we also find:
A photo of a banner touting a "9/11 Press for Truth" screening to be held at Gunn High in Palo Alto.
http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g78/idiotbastard/IMG_0192.jpg
A scan of a print article from the Palo Alto Daily News.
http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g78/idiotbastard/411on911march.png
The object of your unrequited affections, Palo Alto's own Carol Brouillet.
http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g78/idiotbastard/carol.png
A design for a postcard advertising a rally in Palo Alto.
http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g78/idiotbastard/postcard2.jpg
Who created that rally postcard? Carol Brouillet can tell us:
Friday, Brian and I worked on a postcard and the poster for our upcoming rally, trying to get 1000 made in time to pass out at last weekend's events in Palo Alto when Kucinich and Chris Hedges spoke.
Here's what we came up with:
http://www.communitycurrency.org/postcard2.jpg
More stuff from Palo Alto than anywhere else except the WTC site. Yeah, I know, more wacky coincidence, right?
This comment has been removed by the author.
Oh yeah, scumbag? Maybe you can get Google to blacklist their own website as a "malware attack" domain. And I've only begun to trash your non-existent "reputation."
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Sex Predator Brian Good Exposed!
MR, why is figuring out the identities of anonymous internet posters up to you? No doubt the National Security State puts its least intelligent employees on that task. Can't you find something better to do? In my experience in internet debate, speculating about identities is what the dumbest posters do. It's just an ad hominem.
Poor petgoat must be most distressed to be linked to all the salacious lies about me.
So you think that because petgoat accesses images at photobucket, that means petgoat is me? You accessed those images yourself. So that proves you are me!
Look, I understand that you're not very smart. But I don't understand why you want to prove it to the world.
"Can't you find something better to do?"
You're right; debating nutjobs is a waste of time. I don't bother with "Pat Cowardly", and I shouldn't bother with you either.
"Look, I understand that you're not very smart."
Hey, I'm not the one who believes in fake plane passengers, chief.
I never said I believed in fake passengers. Your claim that I did only serves my point about your unintelligence.
Okay, you considered that the passengers might have been fake. Sorry for the inexact language in my previous post.
Mike, there's no reason for you to apologize for Brian Good's filthy lies.
By the way, nice exposé, Mike.
Sex Predator Brian Good Exposed
MR, I consider all the possibilities until they're shown to be wrong. That's basic science. Now you're going to claim that proves I'm petgoat.
Petgoat, you put credence into theories that are shown to be absurd. That's not science, basic or otherwise.
MR, asking for evidence is not putting credence. Your crippled epistemology is showing.
"So MGF, we know all about bin Laden's porn collection but we don't know about his dialysis machine? Is that what you're claiming?"
Do we know about his porn collection? You, of all people, should be suspicious of anything presented by CIA.
"In any case, no evidence of a dialysis machine has been presented. Did bin Laden get a miraculous cure?"
This means there's no evidence either way. It has never been established bin Laden had a serious kidney problem in a credible way. Either way, there has been no list of items recovered or photographed from the raid made public.
So you are the one making shit up.
"MR, asking for evidence is not putting credence."
If you put no credence into the fake passengers nonsense, you wouldn't have asked for more evidence.
There was plenty of evidence days following the event.
Photos, hometowns, workplaces, bios.
If there were really no Sarah Clark teaching sixth grade at Backus Middle School in Washington, people from that school would know it instantly.
Yet, on July 14, 2005, you had to ask for evidence that the Flight 77 passengers were real.
Incredible. Talk about crippled epistemology.
Who said anything about the CIA? Reuters attributed the reports to anonymous officials.
Le Figaro said bin Laden was hospitalized in 2001 in the American Hospital in Dubai for treatment by the urologist Terry Callaway.
CBS said bin Laden was in a Pakistani military hospital in Rawalpindi the night before 9/11.
As usual you try to sound like you know what you're talking about and you just make shit up.
"Who said anything about the CIA? Reuters attributed the reports to anonymous officials."
So we don't know who they are, so why can't they be CIA? If we don't know who they are, why are you dumb enough to believe them? Why the double standard? Oh that's right, your mental feebleness.
"Le Figaro said bin Laden was hospitalized in 2001 in the American Hospital in Dubai for treatment by the urologist Terry Callaway."
So one guy says something (citing sources in French intelligence) so it must be true. Again, a double standard.
"CBS said bin Laden was in a Pakistani military hospital in Rawalpindi the night before 9/11."
Did they say why? Could it be that was where he was getting dialysis? If he did have a kidney problem then chances are we will learn he was treated in a number of Paki hospitals after he fled Afghanistan.
Maybe he was getting a sex change. Who cares?
You're playing dumb. Waste of time.
Willie Rodriguez just kicked your ass. Your crippled ego backed you into yet another corner on bin Laden.
Your are just failing hard this week.
Willie kicked only his own ass. The credence you give to the empty claims of a two-bit con artist only shows your own intellectual deficits.
Only in your fantasy world, chump.
Post a Comment
<< Home