Toronto Hearings Video
Some Truthers have released a video of last years Toronto Hearings which is edited down to "just" 5 hours. I am not sure if I have the endurance and self-loathing to get through this entire thing though. Maybe I can outsource the job to India or something? If anyone else thinks they can make it through the whole thing, leave some comments.
posted by James B. @ 11:40 AM
105 comments
105 Comments:
lol, Griffin have also here the 2 paralyzed fingers...
a classical of colonoscopy...
So this is just 5 hours of the same old made up BS truthers have spewing for years???
There is an Op-ed in today's Washington Post taking Mohammed Morsi to task for flirting with twooferism. A few years ago, anything 9/11 related would have generate a swarm of troofer comments, but today, only two showed up. I think a lot of troofers, at least in the west, are throwing in the towel and (hopefully) deciding they need to do something productive with their lives, assuming that's possible.
humor time
http://goo.gl/ovux8
http://goo.gl/e3AdM
LOL and they say they will post the unedited versions. Will anyone even a truther have the patience to watch this crap?
I watch the 1st few minutes. One think I noticed is that about half the panel were in their 70s or 80s
92elgreage"Outsource the job to India", as if you are any better than someone from India??! You are exactly the type that would attempt such a thing if you were more than an armchair anti-conspiracist.
It seems to be bigots like yourself that can perpetrate such an act. Have you ever read The Art of War , or The Prince? Some angry white man (and I am a white man, but not so angry) thinks he is above others that are not his club's color or income bracket, and that those can, therefore, be expensed toward his goal of global (or regional) domination.
These wars were fought over oil. The "Axis of Evil" countries threatened to make the Euro the currency of oil and we had a new war on our hands within months. Factor in the trillions of dollars our war has cost and will cost into the future, plus hidden costs, and our gasoline is perhaps $20/gallon by some estimates.
If you have studied any history AT ALL you know that this sort of strategy has been employed time and time again toward financial goals. Wars are fought over oil and the crusades over plunder. "In adversity there is opportunity." Yours is the philosophy of "screw unto others". We just needed some adversity. Your bigoted comment about India is the smoke from that very fire. Your bigotry is the proof that you dispel.
Thank you.
Several duplicate comments removed. Len, I commented last year on the panelists:
"What exactly they witnessed will be up to the extinguished, err, distinguished panelists, who look like they would have trouble beating George Burns in the 100-yard dash."
Gee, ad hominem much?
That's clearly all Pat has, and he's a fat, balding gray-hair to boot, so I'm not sure why he's talking about 100-yard dashes. As if he could even finish one.
PAThetic non-debunking from a comic book philosopher, as usual. Keep it up, Pat! We like seeing you fail every time you post your garbage.
Ali the Arab pederast whines, "...PAThetic non-debunking from a comic book philosopher, as usual. Keep it up, Pat! We like seeing you fail every time you post your garbage."
Pat is the author of the OP? Did the idiot goat fucker tell you that, Mr. Pederast?
You're an idiot, aren't you, child molester?
**********
"The Brian Good Insane Homeless Mullet for balding, over-the-hill sex predators."
(Credit to Mike Rosefierce).
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
"Outsource the job to India", as if you are any better than someone from India??!"
Uhh... no... Not saying that I am any better than anyone, but I work in the IT field and like it or not, that is a common metaphor for labor intensive low ROI work.
" Have you ever read The Art of War , or The Prince? "
Yeah, thought the Art of War was overrated. Just a poetic statement of the obvious. The Prince was pretty good.
"The "Axis of Evil" countries threatened to make the Euro the currency of oil and we had a new war on our hands within months."
Which would mean absolutely.... nothing. You can price it in Yen, Rupees or Drachmas, it will still have the same basic price in dollars. Ever heard of floating exchange rates?
"If you have studied any history AT ALL"
Yeah, got my degree from the Jackson School, so I am pretty sure that I have studied some history. Apparently the history you studied came between recess and PE.
The preview image - I could be mistaken, but isn't that a building in Oslo, Norway that Gage featured for a while in his 22,841-slides PPT presentation, but showed, deceptively, without sounds to make sure no Twoofie notices the many awesomely loud BANG BANG BANG BANGs that come with actual demolitions? Kinda telling that the video is thumbnailed with a reminder of that Twoof-fraud :)
This comment has been removed by the author.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Oystein, when one wishes to demonstrate the similarities between the skeleton of a bat and a human being, it is traditional to show pictures that leave out the fur and the skin so as to focus on the structure.
Only a fool would claim "But they don't show you the fur and the skin! It's a fraud!"
Had Mr. Gage wished, he could show a silent verinage demolition. The means by which the building structure is destroyed (explosives, hydraulics, incendiaries) is irrelevant to the fact that a building demolition invariably demonstrates certain features (such as sudden onset, symmetry, rapid descent, totality) that natural collapses do not demonstrate.
Well Brian, that all sounds very intriguing, until you realize that Vérinage is in fact, natural collapse progression initiated by hydraulics. The only thing unnatural about it is the initiation.
..."BANG BANG BANG BANGs that come with actual demolitions"
-Cass Soystein
Another tired, worthless "debunker" canard. First it was "no top-down demos" until you were proven wrong. Then it was "HAS to have explosions" until you were proven wrong with Verinage.
According to idiots like you, Pat, and James, if you haven't seen it, it doesn't exist. Since no one can possibly be that ignorant, I wonder why you continue to make those non-arguments?
"Vérinage is in fact, natural collapse progression initiated by hydraulics." Snowjob
Except there's nothing natural about a collapse initiated by hydraulics. Your statement is esentially meaningless. Try again.
Ok, I'll try again, PC: there's nothing "natural" about planes flying into buildings either, let alone core columns succumbing to creep buckling due to fire-induced overload of already teetering reserve capacity. Ever done the calcs? The perimeter columns had a rather large reserve capacity/safety factor, but the core columns didn't. Plus, cutting out lateral bracing increases the unsupported length of the column, lowering the force required as per Euler's formula.
"Hydraulics" is pretty mild compared to the violence inflicted on the World Trade Center. However, where Vérinage tries to have a building collapse symmetrically by inducing failure evenly, in the case of WTC 2 we saw what happens when failure occurs unevenly (because the plane went in at a more oblique angle): tilt and rotation around the center of mass. I have an animated gif showing this action on WTC 2 which I'll link you if you'd like.
And by the way, PC, your objection, had I not just methodically refuted it, would have only applied to collapse initiation, and not to collapse progression. You do realize this don't you? Anyways, enjoy the daily trollfest. You've got a good sense of humor. (Yes, I'm leaving that wide-open for a comeback)
Oh, and I know Brian'll be in here in a minute stumbling all over himself attacking Bazant's centroid, because, in the words of a prolific friend, addressing Brian:
"Bazant seems like a prick, but he's got more engineering sense in the smegma staining his underwear than you do in your entirety."
You didn't refute PC's objection at all, SnowCrash. There's nothing natural about hydraulic initiation, explosive initiation, or incendiary initiation--particularly since initiation must be simultaneous on all columns to show the unnatural features of symmetry, totality, and near freefall acceleration.
You seem to be claiming that since the plane impact was unnatural, then we should not be surprised to see the unnatural features of controlled demolition as well. Structural engineers tell me that asymmetrical damage can not cause symmetrical collapse.
This comment has been removed by the author.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Your prolific friend's expertise in men's underwear is noted. That you consider her remark clever shows you to be socially backward. That you consider it to be of any consequence shows you to be logically challenged.
SnowCrash is a dick but I must admit, he's smarter than Pat Cowardly put together.
According to idiots like you, Pat, and James, if you haven't seen it, it doesn't exist.
That's how science works.
You live in a pseudoskeptical fantasy world governed by "if I can imagine it, it must be real."
Right, I can't even see my computer screen 'cause of all the nitrogen in the way. Gotta get a new vacuum pump and clear this room out.
'Right, I can't even see my computer screen 'cause of all the nitrogen in the way. Gotta get a new vacuum pump and clear this room out."
So...you can't see through a colorless gas? A gas which can be detected and measured?
Watching Mr. Wizard on TV when you were a kid doesn't count as a science class.
RGT was saying that the way science works is that if you can't see it, it doesn't exist. Sorry you missed that. Hey, thanks for your blatant lies about the National Security Act of 1947. They were very amusing.
I bet when you go golfing you carry a hole around in your pocket.
"there's nothing "natural" about...core columns succumbing to creep buckling due to fire-induced overload of already teetering reserve capacity."
I agree. There's nothing natural about it at all. That's why it takes artificial removal of columns and resistance. What point are you trying unsuccessfully to make?
"Hydraulics" is pretty mild compared to the violence inflicted on the World Trade Center. "
Another meaningless statement. Are you trying to claim the towers "collapsed naturally" or not, Snowjob? Why not just say so?
"he's smarter than Pat Cowardly put together (sic)" -Richard Gage is Sensible
Yeah, RGT. You're smart AND credible.
Yeah, RGT. You're smart AND credible.
That's true.
Still butthurt about that time I trolled you for three days, I see.
Ali the Arab pederast whines, "...Are you trying to claim the towers 'collapsed naturally'"
What's "natural" about flying two 767s into a pair of skyscrapers?
Fucking idiot, aren't you, Mr. Pederast?
**********
"The Brian Good Insane Homeless Mullet for balding, over-the-hill sex predators."
(Credit to Mike Rosefierce).
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
"I agree. There's nothing natural about it at all."
Correct, PC, there's nothing natural about planes crashing into the WTC, there's nothing natural about the structural damage inflicted by those crashes, there's nothing natural about the ensuing fires and there's nothing natural about the eventual progressive collapse. The whole "natural" label is pointless, because you're apparently experiencing selective amnesia about some decidedly unnatural links in a causal chain which caused the demise of the towers.
"That's why it takes artificial removal of columns and resistance."
Yes, by planes and fire.
"What point are you trying unsuccessfully to make?"
What's yours?
"Another meaningless statement."
Another meaningless retort.
"Are you trying to claim the towers "collapsed naturally" or not, Snowjob? Why not just say so?"
I'm claiming deliberate plane crashes are as unnatural as "controlled demolition".
You, on the other hand, are forcing a causal disconnect between the plane crashes, structural damage, the fire, weakening of reserve capacity and progressive collapse. There is nothing "natural" about what happened by any definition. The plane crashes were deliberate, unless you mean to say they got lost looking for JFK airport and accidentally plowed into the twin towers at full throttle on a clear day.
Is that your "argument"? No? Then the collapses were not natural.
I hope that some day you'll be able to progress past a barrage of frustrated oneliners, PC. You don't lack passion or conviction; you lack technical acumen. What you must first and foremost concede, is that the vaunted "impossibility" of progressive collapse due to plane crashes, structural damage and fire is utterly contrived. It's a baseless justification device for CD; rather than arguing from impossibility, argue from direct evidence. That, I can respect. I can't respect popscience claptrap copy pasted from the AE911Truth website, or perversions of engineering concepts, concepts you don't comprehend. You're a comment section comedian, not an engineer. If you're the Real McCoy, then address the technical argument laid out to you earlier appropriately, instead of posting facile oneliner cop-outs because the subject matter exceeds your intellectual bandwidth. I'll respond again when you do. Cheers.
The planes didn't bring the buildings down. If they did, the buildings would have fallen immediately. The jet fuel burned off in perhaps as little as four minutes (say FEMA experts) and certainly less than ten (says NIST). So what we had was an office fire.
So you seek to discard the unnatural features of the collapses (symmetry, totality, speed) by claiming the destruction looked like controlled demolition because, like controlled demolition, its cause was unnatural.
This is absurd. Controlled demolition requires that the structure be removed in a carefully orchestrated sequence. You unnatural plane crash causes asymmetrical damage. It can not cause the simultaneous destruction of all the columns on one floor.
Asymmetrical damage can not cause symmetrical collapse.
We've already gone over this subject, jackass.
There was no "symmetry, totality, and near freefall [SIC] acceleration."
Your self-serving "perception" of an event is NOT reality.
**********
"The Brian Good Insane Homeless Mullet for balding, over-the-hill sex predators."
(Credit to Mike Rosefierce).
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
There is symmetry, totality, and near-freefall acceleration.
Citing a college dropout, sex predator and physical science illiterate isn't particularly convincing, jackass.
FAIL.
**********
"The Brian Good Insane Homeless Mullet for balding, over-the-hill sex predators."
(Credit to Mike Rosefierce).
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
Look at the videos. It's symmetrical, total, and near freefall.
Bullshit!
The videos don't prove a thing because the dust cloud obscures the collapse. Your "symmetry, totality, and near freefall [SIC] acceleration" malarkey is speculation at best.
"Controlled demolition," moreover, was ruled out by the experts back in 2001.
"...Our team, working at ground zero, including myself, never saw indication of explosive use that would have been evident after the event. You just can't clean up all that det cord, shock tube, blasting cap remnants, copper backing from explosive charges, burn marks along clean-cut edges of columns, etc., nor is there any evidence in the thousands of photos taken by the press and dozens of agencies over the following days." -- Brent Blanchard, Demolition Expert; International Society of Explosives Engineers.
That's expert testimony, asshole.
Until Brent Blanchard's expert testimony is challenged by another demolition expert his conclusion stands--your lies and propaganda not withstanding.
Now stop citing yourself as an authority, jackass. You're not an authority. You're a proven liar, sex predator, college dropout and a compulsive liar.
Go to bed old man.
Don't you have an innocent troofer to sexually harass?
**********
"The Brian Good Insane Homeless Mullet for balding, over-the-hill sex predators."
(Credit to Mike Rosefierce).
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
The dust cloud is symmetrical.
Brent Blanchard's belief that a lack of det cord rules out controlled demolition is unintelligent.
Brian "drag queen for 9/11 troof" Good brays, "...The dust cloud is symmetrical."
You are certifiably insane.
Go to bed old man. Obviously, your two remaining synapses are dedicated to drinking and sniffing glue.
**********
"The Brian Good Insane Homeless Mullet for balding, over-the-hill sex predators."
(Credit to Mike Rosefierce).
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
The dust cloud is symmetrical. Look at the videos. How can an asymmetrical collapse generate a symmetrical dust cloud?
"symmetrical dust cloud"
LOL!
Still sniffing glue, sex predator?
Have another hit off the glue pot, dufus.
Stick to mopping floors, nut-bag.
**********
"The Brian Good Insane Homeless Mullet for balding, over-the-hill sex predators."
(Credit to Mike Rosefierce).
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
"you lack technical acumen"
"...vaunted "impossibility" of progressive collapse due to plane crashes, structural damage and fire is utterly contrived"
BECAUSE SNOWCRASH SAYS SO, DAMMIT!! NO SOURCES OR PROOF NECESSARY!!!!
Why are you so shy about stating your position, Snowjob? Let me guess-- you think the piledrivers went all the way to the ground before destroying themeselves, the 100+MPH ejections on all 4 sides of wtc2 were "puffs of dust", the girders hurled at over 60 MPH just happened to "flex", and the 'technical acumen' of 1700+ architects and engineers pales next to your vaunted 'calcs'?
How many observables did your 'calcs' and 'acumen' cover, Snowjob? Give us your list. And don't forget that the "piledrivers" visibly come apart in the first 2 seconds.
You have a lot of work to do. Maybe if you weren't so busy namecalling...
Yo Ali the Arab Pederast!
You do, in fact, lack technical acumen. And I can prove it with one question:
What's the difference between temperature and heat?
**********
"The Brian Good Insane Homeless Mullet for balding, over-the-hill sex predators."
(Credit to Mike Rosefierce).
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
SnowCrash -- before you spend time documenting your sources, it's only fair to warn you that Cowardly has this odd habit of demanding sources from others while citing only his own imagination. Proceed if you wish but you don't need to. You've already defeated him.
GutterBall, anyone can from the videos that the dust clouds are symmetrical. Your habit of substituting invective for an argument is noted.
PC, the "piledriver" meme is a joke. What kind of piledriver hits a pile once and drives it into the ground? They hit the pile again and again and again. They hit and a jet of steam pushes them back up and they hit again, and another jet pushes them up-- day after day and week after week.
GutterBall, so there you go with the stooooopid tests again. Even MGF and Ian can google temperature and heat. It's meaningless.
Snowcrash doesn't document. I bet he still thinks Willie Fraudriguez rescued 15 persons and saved hundreds.
Brian "drag queen for 9/11 troof" Good squeals, "...anyone can from the videos that the dust clouds are symmetrical. Your habit of substituting invective for an argument is noted."
Bullshit!
The "dust clouds are symmetrical" in your diseased mind and your diseased mind only. The dust cloud, moreover, doesn't tell us anything about the alleged "symmetry of collapse"--you droolin' jackass.
FAIL.
Brian "drag queen for 9/11 troof" Good squeals, "...so there you go with the stooooopid tests again. Even MGF and Ian can google [SIC] temperature and heat. It's meaningless."
Yeah, that explains why you and you fellow incompetent, Ali the Arab Pederast, can't answer the question.
**********
"The Brian Good Insane Homeless Mullet for balding, over-the-hill sex predators."
(Credit to Mike Rosefierce).
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
Brian "drag queen for 9/11 troof" Good whines, "...Snowcrash doesn't document. I bet he still thinks Willie Fraudriguez [SIC] rescued 15 persons and saved hundreds."
Pot meet kettle.
So goat fucker, are you still smarting because Snowcrash had the good sense to have your insane ass banned from TroofAction?
And didn't Snowcrash refer to as a "miserable troll"?
It sucks to be you, "punxsutawneybarney."
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
**********
"The Brian Good Insane Homeless Mullet for balding, over-the-hill sex predators."
(Credit to Mike Rosefierce).
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
There is symmetry, totality, and near-freefall acceleration.
You forgot "pyroclastic flows", Brian. Remember when you were babbling endlessly about the volcano that erupted at the WTC? How come you don't talk about that anymore? Is it because the ridicule you received here made you stop?
Well, you can stop babbling about free-fall acceleration and symmetry, since those are also delusions of your feeble, glue-addled mind.
Anyway, I'd like to remind everyone that Brian STILL hasn't gotten a single one of the widows' questions answered.
I guess that's to be expected when Brian can't even hold down a job mopping floors or get a decent haircut.
Ian wrote, "...You forgot "pyroclastic flows", Brian. Remember when you were babbling endlessly about the volcano that erupted at the WTC?"
ROTFLMAO!
Ian, check it out! Brian "drag queen for 9/11 troof" Good outed himself as punxsutawneybarney.
LOL!
**********
"The Brian Good Insane Homeless Mullet for balding, over-the-hill sex predators."
(Credit to Mike Rosefierce).
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
This comment has been removed by the author.
Ian, I never babbled about any volcanoes at the WTC.
If it's a mistake to refer to the hot dust clouds on 9/11 as pyroclastic flows, at least I'm in good company.
Here's what Dr. Herbert Huppert, Professor of Theoretical Geophysics and Director of the Institute of Theoretical Geophysics at the University of Cambridge, wrote:
"Aside from natural events, a very tragic example of a pyroclastic flow is what happened on the 11th of September, 2001."
http://plus.maths.org/content/going-flow
Gosh, GutterBall, if Dr. Huppert said it was a pyroclastic flow and I said it was a pyroclastic flow, then I must be Dr. Huppert, right?
Ian, I never babbled about any volcanoes at the WTC.
False.
If it's a mistake to refer to the hot dust clouds on 9/11 as pyroclastic flows, at least I'm in good company.
It is a mistake, just like everything else you've ever done in your failed life.
Gosh, GutterBall, if Dr. Huppert said it was a pyroclastic flow and I said it was a pyroclastic flow, then I must be Dr. Huppert, right?
Squeal squeal squeal!
Bill, Brian posted as "punxsutawneybarney" on this blog once. I guess after hours of spamming youtube, he forgot to log out of that ID before spamming this blog as "snug.bug". He deleted the post, but I took a screeenshot.
Brian, everyone knows you are punxsutawneybarney because only one person has a deranged homosexual obsession with Willie Rodriguez. You didn't have to post here as punxsutawneybarney for us to know it.
I'm curious how Brian came up with "punxsutawneybarney" anyway. I'm guessing that he was sniffing glue at 3 am in his parents' basement, wearing his favorite bra and thong, and was watching a "Flintstones" marathon when he accidentally changed the channel on the remote, and "Groundhog Day" was on.
And that's when he realized he could become the revolutionary who changes the world by making 9/11 truth clear to everyone, and the best way to do this is to post homosexual stalker spam about Willie Rodriguez all over Youtube. I guess those are the kind of revelations one would have if high on glue at 3 am.
Did you take a screenshot when Dr. Huppert posted as Michele Norris?
I destroyed Michele Norris and Bob Woodward's account with the following post, shit-for-brains.
Your entire argument is BULLSHIT. And your Cofer Black account, which is attributed to Bob Woodward, is DIRECTLY REFUTED BY RICHARD BEN-VENISTE AND MR. TENET.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
Now squeal, lie, change the subject, obfuscate and make an ass of yourself, cretin.
**********
"The Brian Good Insane Homeless Mullet for balding, over-the-hill sex predators."
(Credit to Mike Rosefierce).
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
This comment has been removed by the author.
So you're calling Bob Woodward a liar? He says: "Black later said, 'The only thing we didn't do was pull the trigger to the gun we were holding to her head.'"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/30/AR2006093000282_pf.html
I guess you didn't notice that your argument from Tenet and Ben Veniste addresses Tenet's attitudes, not Black's. I guess you didn't notice that "feeling they were ignored" is not the issue. The question is were they actually ignored, and the fact is they were.
You are very confused. Willfully confused.
Brian "drag queen for 9/11 troof" Good babbles, "...Gosh, GutterBall, if Dr. Huppert said it was a pyroclastic flow and I said it was a pyroclastic flow, then I must be Dr. Huppert, right?"
Unlike you, goat fucker, I can read.
The word is pyroclastic.
pyro pref. 1. Fire; heat: pyrotechnic. 2. Relating to the action of fire or heat: pyrography. 3. Fever: pyrogen. 4. Derived from an acid by the loss of a water molecule: pyrosulfuric acid.
Source: Pyro
Thus, pyroclastic flows are characterized by intense heat.
Wikipedia tells us the following:
"...A pyroclastic flow (also known scientifically as a pyroclastic density current) is a fast-moving current of superheated gas and rock (collectively known as tephra), which reaches speeds moving away from a volcano of up to 700 km/h (450 mph). The gas can reach temperatures of about 1,000 °C (1,830 °F). Pyroclastic flows normally hug the ground and travel downhill, or spread laterally under gravity. Their speed depends upon the density of the current, the volcanic output rate, and the gradient of the slope. They are a common and devastating result of certain explosive volcanic eruptions." -- Wikipedia
So why weren't the New Yorkers who were trapped in the dust cloud poached like fish in a steamer?
Obviously, Dr. Huppert is a waste of an advanced academic degree.
He's conflating pyroclastic flow with turbidity flow or, if prefer, turbidity current.
Wikipedia tells us the following:
"...A turbidity current is a current of rapidly moving, sediment-laden water moving down a slope through water, or another fluid. The current moves because it has a higher density and turbidity than the fluid through which it flows. The driving force of a turbidity current is obtained from the sediment, which renders the turbid water heavier than the clear water above." -- Wikipedia
Air--you droolin' moron--is a FLUID.
Thus, Dr. Huppert's assertion is FALSE. Someone should IMMEDIATELY revoke this clown's doctorate.
Obviously, the dust from ANY building collapse is a turbidity current of flow.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
**********
"The Brian Good Insane Homeless Mullet for balding, over-the-hill sex predators."
(Credit to Mike Rosefierce).
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
Brian "drag queen for 9/11 troof" Good lies, "...I guess you didn't notice that your argument from Tenet and Ben Veniste addresses Tenet's attitudes, not Black's."
False.
It's not my argument--you cretin. The information comes from the New York Times. And the Times addresses Bob Woodward's claims, not "Tenet's attitudes"--you Goddamned fool.
From the New York Times we read the following:
"...Officials now agree that on July 10, 2001, Mr. Tenet and his counterterrorism deputy, J. Cofer Black, were so alarmed about an impending Al Qaeda attack that they demanded an emergency meeting at the White House with Ms. Rice and her National Security Council staff.
"According to two former intelligence officials, Mr. Tenet told those assembled at the White House about the growing body of intelligence the Central Intelligence Agency had collected pointing to an impending Al Qaeda attack. But both current and former officials took issue with Mr. Woodward’s account that Mr. Tenet and his aides left the meeting in frustration, feeling as if Ms. Rice had ignored them.
"Mr. Tenet told members of the Sept. 11 commission about the July 10 meeting when they interviewed him in early 2004, but committee members said the former C.I.A. director never indicated he had left the White House with the impression that he had been ignored.
"'Tenet never told us that he was brushed off,' said Richard Ben-Veniste, a Democratic member of the commission. 'We certainly would have followed that up.'" -- By Philip Shenon and Mark Mazzetti, The New York Times, 2 October 2006.
Mr. Cofer Black was one of Mr. Tenet's aids--you lying jackass.
See? You're an idiot who can't read or be trusted to tell the truth.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
**********
"The Brian Good Insane Homeless Mullet for balding, over-the-hill sex predators."
(Credit to Mike Rosefierce).
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
UtterFail, your spambulous posting of the same erroneous bullshit in multiple threads is rude.
Bob Woodward wrote: "Black later said, 'The only thing we didn't do was pull the trigger to the gun we were holding to her head.'"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/30/AR2006093000282_pf.html
Perhaps if you would learn to google your opinions wouldn't be so peculiar.
Your analysis of the evidence is incompetent. The context of the statement is the time they left the meeting. At the time they left the meeting they felt they had not been brushed off.
But as subsequent non-events showed, in fact Condi ignored them. So their attitudes at the time of the meeting are irrelevant to anyone except a lunatic like yourself that is desperate to be right about something, anything, just once in his silly little life--and still failing utterly.
Brian "drag queen for 9/11 troof" Good lies, "...your spambulous [SIC] posting of the same erroneous bullshit in multiple threads is rude...Bob Woodward wrote: 'Black later said, "The only thing we didn't do was pull the trigger to the gun we were holding to her head.""
False. Now, as expected, you're PETTIFOGGING.
Learn to read, goat fucker.
"...But both current and former officials took issue with Mr. Woodward’s account that Mr. Tenet AND HIS AIDES left the meeting in frustration, feeling as if Ms. Rice had ignored them...'Tenet never told us that he was brushed off,' said Richard Ben-Veniste, a Democratic member of the commission. 'We certainly would have followed that up.'" -- The New York Times, 2 October 2006
Get it through your thick skull: Mr. Cofer Black was one of Mr. Tenet's aids--you lying jackass.
Brian "drag queen for 9/11 troof" Good lies, "...Your analysis of the evidence is incompetent. The context of the statement is the time they left the meeting. At the time they left the meeting they felt they had not been brushed off....But as subsequent non-events showed, in fact Condi ignored them."
False.
The New York Times article I reference above was written on 2 October 2006, idiot. Thus, your malarkey about "context" is 180 degrees out of phase with reality. (The WP article you reference, by the way, is dated 1 October 2006). As usual, your argument is fallacious nonsense.
See? You're an idiot who can't read or be trusted to tell the truth.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
**********
"The Brian Good Insane Homeless Mullet for balding, over-the-hill sex predators."
(Credit to Mike Rosefierce).
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
If they left the briefing thinking they had not been brushed off, and if Condi in fact ignored them (which she did) then they were in fact brushed off, whatever they may have felt at the time.
I'm sorry your emotional problems prevent you from thinking clearly, but it's not my fault.
From your own article, jackass:
"...Tenet and Black felt they were not getting through to Rice. She was polite, but they felt the brush-off. President Bush had said he didn't want to swat at flies." -- The Washington Post, 1 October 2006.
Now try to blame it on Dr. Rice--you evil Log Cabin Republican bigot.
See? You're an idiot who can't read or be trusted to tell the truth.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
**********
"The Brian Good Insane Homeless Mullet for balding, over-the-hill sex predators."
(Credit to Mike Rosefierce).
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
Where are you, Snowy? You were all set to prove that your 'calcs' and 'technical acumen' make me a non-engineer, or something.
Should we call you SnowCrush-Down, SnowCrush-Up? Do your calculations allow for how dutiful the 2 "piledrivers" were, to wait until the full descent before killing themselves? Or am I just being Bazany?
What about your 'animated GIF' that refutes the technical expertise of 1700+ Architecture professionals, not to mention what's plainly visible to honest observers?
Are the 'calcs' REALLY sufficient to have let NIST off the hook from explaining the observed phenomena of the collapse progression?
C'mon SnowCrush, we're all best friends here. No really.
Gosh, Cowardly. You must think 1700 is a lot of people.
RGT wrote, "...Gosh, Cowardly. You must think 1700 is a lot of people."
Yep, you're absolutely correct, RGT. Proof?
There are 600,000 scientists and engineers in the United States. There are allegedly "1700" members of A&E 9/11 troof.
Let's do the math, shall we?
1700/600,000 x 100 = 0.28%
Thus, the alleged membership of A&E 9/11 troof doesn't rise to the level of statistical significance.
As you can see, Ali the Pederast is an idiot.
**********
"The Brian Good Insane Homeless Mullet for balding, over-the-hill sex predators."
(Credit to Mike Rosefierce).
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
Your statistical argument is bogus, as I have pointed out before.
According to the Scripps-Howard poll, as of July 2006 when AE911Truth was just a gleam in Richard Gage's eye, 16% of Americans thought it was somewhat likely or very likely that the towers came down through controlled demolition. That represents 30 million adult Americans.
Of those 30 million, 15,000 have chosen to sign the petition at AE911Truth.org. That's 1 in 2000, or 1/20th of 1% of those who find the controlled demolition hypothesis credible.
Applying this same ratio to the 1700 architects and engineers who have signed, we get 3-1/2 million architects and engineers who can be expected to find the controlled demolition hypothesis credible.
16% of Americans thought it was somewhat likely or very likely that the towers came down through controlled demolition.
In that poll, 12% indicated a belief that no plane hit the Pentagon. This must mean that the no-plane theory is also worthy of serious investigation.
The issue was whether the 1700 architects and engineers were statistically significant. Everybody knows that argumentum ad numerum is a logical fallacy.
"...Your statistical argument is bogus, as I have pointed out before...Of those 30 million, 15,000 have chosen to sign the petition at AE911Truth.org. That's 1 in 2000, or 1/20th of 1% of those who find the controlled demolition hypothesis credible."
Logical fallacy: Straw man argument.
I never said a word about the alleged "15,000 [who] have chosen to sign the petition at AE911Truth.org."
My argument was limited to scientists and engineers.
Nor did I claim that any proposition was true or false. Thus, your "argumentum ad numerum" (the correct term is Argumentum ad Populum--you cretin) malarkey is a straw man argument, too.
The fact remains that the numbers don't lie. The number of "scientists and engineers" who buy into da troof is statistically insignificant (0.28%).
See? You can't "debate" without resorting logical fallacies.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
**********
"The Brian Good Insane Homeless Mullet for balding, over-the-hill sex predators."
(Credit to Mike Rosefierce).
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
It's not statistically insignificant, as I showed, since related statistics show that of the 30 million Americans who find the controlled demolition hypothesis credible, only 1 in 2000 of them sign the petition.
If you weren't so incompetent, you wouldn't be so confused.
Your "statistics" are not credible.
As anyone with a background in statistics knows--which, of course, excludes you--you droolin' idiot--a poll can be manipulated to provide any outcome desired by the pollster. This fact was also admitted IN PUBLIC by Republican pollster, Frank Luntz.
FoxNews' Frank Luntz Exposes Manipulation of Polls by Pollsters.
Lies, damned lies and statistics.
Your "statistics" aren't worth the ASCII characters you waste to post them.
Part over whole multiplied by 100 will always yield an EXACT percentage:
1700/600,000 x 100 = 0.28%
Thus, the alleged membership of A&E 9/11 troof doesn't rise to the level of statistical significance.
Should we expect less from a jackass who doesn't understand a simple concept like ΔT? Probably not.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
**********
"The Brian Good Insane Homeless Mullet for balding, over-the-hill sex predators."
(Credit to Mike Rosefierce).
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
**********
"The Brian Good Insane Homeless Mullet for balding, over-the-hill sex predators."
(Credit to Mike Rosefierce).
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
Oh so polls don't count, quotes in the Washington Post don't count. You're just a little Bushbot know-nothing, aren't you? I understand ΔT just fine--and unlike you I understand that there's nothing to understand. All you got to do is babble some Greek at ButtGale and he goes all soft and juicy inside.
Your poll doesn't prove anything.
Nor does your poll address my argument. You're comparing apples to oranges. And, as I pointed out above, your entire argument is a premised on a straw man argument.
In fact, you're the "Bushbot," as your baseless hate propaganda directed against Dr. Rice proves beyond a doubt.
So how much does the Hoover Institution pay you to spam the Internet for 18 hours a day with hate propaganda directed against Dr. Rice--you Log Cabin Republican bigot? Do you suck George W. Bush's cock, too?
And you don't know a damned thing about ΔT. That's why you couldn't answer my question. And you didn't know the answer UNTIL I GAVE YOU THE ANSWER.
The proof is in the pudding, and you don't know fuck-all about the physical sciences.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
**********
"The Brian Good Insane Homeless Mullet for balding, over-the-hill sex predators."
(Credit to Mike Rosefierce).
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
Oh so polls don't count, quotes in the Washington Post don't count. You're just a little Bushbot know-nothing, aren't you? I understand ΔT just fine--and unlike you I understand that there's nothing to understand. Any idiot can google ΔT, but I guess you can't.
All anyone has to do is babble some Greek at ButtGale and he goes all soft and juicy inside. How's that Zorba thing working out for you?
Trying to bury your latest humiliating defeat in an avalanche of lies and squealspam--you hateful Log Cabin Republican racist?
Your polls are less than worthless, and your quotes from the Washington Post were proven to be lies by omission. The content of the Washington Post article YOU PRESENT AS "EVIDENCE" proves that you're lying. And I quote:
"...Tenet and Black felt they were not getting through to Rice. She was polite, but they felt the brush-off. President Bush had said he didn't want to swat at flies." -- The Washington Post, 1 October 2006.
All you have are lies by omission and logical fallacies.
You're as worthless as you are malevolent.
**********
"The Brian Good Insane Homeless Mullet for balding, over-the-hill sex predators."
(Credit to Mike Rosefierce).
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
So what's your point, ButtGale? Are you claiming that your darling torture-queen Condi stopped 9/11?
Name one thing she did to stop 9/11.
According to the Scripps-Howard poll, as of July 2006 when AE911Truth was just a gleam in Richard Gage's eye, 16% of Americans thought it was somewhat likely or very likely that the towers came down through controlled demolition. That represents 30 million adult Americans.
Nobody cares.
Of those 30 million, 15,000 have chosen to sign the petition at AE911Truth.org. That's 1 in 2000, or 1/20th of 1% of those who find the controlled demolition hypothesis credible.
Just more proof that nobody cares. 15,000 is the attendance at a Royals-Twins game in September. That's how pathetically small your band of crackpots is.
Applying this same ratio to the 1700 architects and engineers who have signed, we get 3-1/2 million architects and engineers who can be expected to find the controlled demolition hypothesis credible.
Which just demonstrates that your understanding of statistics is what we'd expect from a failed janitor who lives with his parents and believes in magic thermite elves.
In that poll, 12% indicated a belief that no plane hit the Pentagon. This must mean that the no-plane theory is also worthy of serious investigation.
And Brian, being the pathetic lunatic and liar that he is, sets himself up to be pwn3d by RGT. Let's see how Brian responds...
The issue was whether the 1700 architects and engineers were statistically significant. Everybody knows that argumentum ad numerum is a logical fallacy.
With hysterical squealing and crying, as expected.
It's not statistically insignificant, as I showed, since related statistics show that of the 30 million Americans who find the controlled demolition hypothesis credible, only 1 in 2000 of them sign the petition.
If you weren't so incompetent, you wouldn't be so confused.
Brian has been completely humiliated, so all he can do is squeal and cry now.
You're a fucking idiot.
The point--you jackass--is that you LIED ABOUT DR. RICE.
You quote mined the Washington Post article you cited as "evidence" and carefully omitted the most crucial sentence from your hate propaganda--and I quote:
"...Tenet and Black felt they were not getting through to Rice. She was polite, but they felt the brush-off. President Bush had said he didn't want to swat at flies." -- The Washington Post, 1 October 2006.
So why did you carefully omit that CRUCIAL SENTENCE?
Answer: You're a QUOTE MINER with the morals of a street-walking whore. Thus, you're devoid of intellectual honesty. You're a rat fucker who abuses the Internet.
How do we know when the goat fucker is lying?
Answer: His liver spotted-hands are touching his semen-encrusted keyboard.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
**********
"The Brian Good Insane Homeless Mullet for balding, over-the-hill sex predators."
(Credit to Mike Rosefierce).
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
I also see that Brian didn't even address my devastating proof that he is punxsutawneybarney. I've humiliated him again, as usual.
It must suck to be pwn3d by someone half your age but with 10 times your intellect, huh Brian?
When all else fails, claim victory and flee, eh Ian?
And I think this would be a good time to mention that Brian STILL hasn't gotten a single question from the widows answered. Not one.
When all else fails, claim victory and flee, eh Ian?
I haven't fled. I'm here enjoying your hysterical squealing as you spend another lonely Friday night in your parents basement babbling about magic thermite elves on the last internet forum on earth that hasn't banned you for being a liar and a lunatic.
Ian wrote, "...I also see that Brian didn't even address my devastating proof that he is punxsutawneybarney."
He won't touch that question with a ten foot pole.
Witness the following thread. I've asked the asshole REPEATEDLY to address the "punxsutawneybarney" question, yet no response is forthcoming.
It's not what he says that's significant. After all, every word that emanates from his semen-encrusted keyboard is a lie. It's what he DOESN'T say that tells the tale.
**********
"The Brian Good Insane Homeless Mullet for balding, over-the-hill sex predators."
(Credit to Mike Rosefierce).
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
UtterFail, I've explained many times why I don't comment on anonymous internet identities.
If I ever deny that I am any anonymous identity, then if I ever refuse to deny that I am another anonymous identity then Ian will claim that I admitted that I was that identity.
You still haven't commented on the fact that by your logic, I am also Michele Norris and Dr. Huppert.
Idiot lies, "...I've explained many times why I don't comment on anonymous internet identities."
Bullshit!
You're a liar. That much is perfectly clear.
You won't comment on your myriad sock puppets because you use sock puppets in order to make it look like 9/11 troof is widely supported and to create false "support" for your idiotic theories.
You're a fraud and a charlatan.
Idiot lies, "...You still haven't commented on the fact that by your logic, I am also Michele Norris and Dr. Huppert."
I never said anything of the sort--you lying homosexual degenerate.
You'll say anything when your back is against the wall, won't you, scumbag?
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
**********
"The Brian Good Insane Homeless Mullet for balding, over-the-hill sex predators."
(Credit to Mike Rosefierce).
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
"Snowcrash doesn't document. I bet he still thinks Willie Fraudriguez rescued 15 persons and saved hundreds."
Yes, I do. I also think Willie should sue your insane ass for slander. Your actions are criminal, in my opinion, and Rodriguez deserves to have legal recourse.
"Pat Cowardly" said: "What about your 'animated GIF' that refutes the technical expertise of 1700+ Architecture professionals, not to mention what's plainly visible to honest observers?"
Argument from misleading authority, but as promised, here it is.
http://i941.photobucket.com/albums/ad257/snow__crash/roto3.gif
Anything else, PC, you gotta try harder. What you said betrays collosal ignorance of the Bazant paper.
Like I said, I know you're passionate, but you're just mortally ignorant, and you're copy/pasting or just plain parroting AE911Truth talking points, which is tragic. You appear to know nothing but that which you were told by AE911Truth.
I also think Willie should sue your insane ass for slander. Your actions are criminal, in my opinion, and Rodriguez deserves to have legal recourse.
You'd criminalize speech? Fucking fascist.
https://www.eff.org/issues/bloggers/legal/liability/defamation
This comment has been removed by the author.
UtterFail, I have many times explained why I don't comment on anonymous internet identities. Maybe you haven't read my explanations because you're so busy cutting and pasting your own spambulous nonsense that you don't have time to read the other posts.
SnowCrash, you're making a fool of yourself. It seems you don't know the difference between slander and libel, and then you cite an authority on defamation that indicts your libelous and demonstrably false claim that I am insane.
Your expressed confidence in Willie's veracity shows you to be not just gullible, but irresponsible. Willie's claims of 15 rescued and hundreds saved can not be verified, not even eleven years later. I have proven that his claim of hundreds saved is impossible. I have proven that the four pillars of Willie's hero story--the 15 rescues, the 100's saved, the 22-story collapse, and Last Man Out--are all lies. Your credulity in this matter justifies much doubt in your powers of judgment.
The reasons Willie has no legal recourse are quite plainly stated in your own eff cite, which it seems you didn't bother to read. That Willie has done his damndest to make himself a public figure is uncontestable, and "Truth is an absolute defense" is pretty emphatic.
Your irresponsible failure to fact-check Willie's story before endorsing it is bad enough--for you then to climb from such a shaky platform to the conclusion that I am a criminal is reckless and unintelligent.
https://www.eff.org/issues/bloggers/legal/liability/defamation
I know what it is. But it's not a crime in California, and I find it strange that a Stallman-worshipping, FOSS-devoted, privacy-obsessed, EFF-invoking, anti-post-9/11-world activist would advocate imprisoning people for words they spoke. Sounds like something George W. Bush would have done.
Oh wait, some places have been doing it for years.
Willie R has an astonishing power to make people abandon their principles and their rational faculties. I saw him captivate a hall filled with 600 people, I saw them throw money into the box. I guess they saw a hero.
What I saw in that room was something different--a lying braggart, a mix of Jim Bakker and Liberace--and I wasn't the only one to see that. I can prove that old Jiggle-cheeks is a fraud, and he can't prove his hero tale.
You're doing Dunning and Kruger proud, sex predator.
Lies by omission, distortions and logical fallacies aren't proof, fool.
Sexually harassed any innocent troofers lately, freak?
**********
"The Brian Good Insane Homeless Mullet for balding, over-the-hill sex predators."
(Credit to Mike Rosefierce).
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
All you provide is your own opinions, UtterFail. Opinions of anonymous internet posters are like virtual assholes--cyberspace is full of them--and their worth can be judged accordingly.
I know what it is. But it's not a crime in California, and I find it strange that a Stallman-worshipping, FOSS-devoted, privacy-obsessed, EFF-invoking, anti-post-9/11-world activist would advocate imprisoning people for words they spoke. Sounds like something George W. Bush would have done.
First of all, I did not advocate imprisonment. A fine will do. But that's up for the judge to decide if it ever comes to that.
And can you please prove that libel/slander/defamation is not a criminal offense in California?
Oh wait, some places have been doing it for years.
Yes. If freedom of speech was absolute, I have the freedom to stage an evening of absurdist poetry in anyone's living room, at any time. Sometimes rights conflict, such as privacy and freedom of the press. You're being flippant.
I think first and foremost, I'd like to know if your statement about California is true.
http://www.citmedialaw.org/legal-guide/california-defamation-law
Please prove it, or retract.
I feel confident that Willie Rodriguez, as an involuntary limited-purpose public figure, could sue Brian Good in court and get damages, since Good has demonstrated actual malice in his words and actions.
Brian "Poster child for Dunning-Kruger effect" Good lies, "...All you provide is your own opinions."
Yeah, that explains why I quote expert testimony and document every jot and tittle.
Did your mother teach you to lie with impunity, goat fucker?
**********
"The Brian Good Insane Homeless Mullet for balding, over-the-hill sex predators."
(Credit to Mike Rosefierce).
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
http://www.citmedialaw.org/legal-guide/california-defamation-law
Please prove it, or retract.
The link you provide proves it. It's a civil offense, not a criminal offense.
I feel confident that Willie Rodriguez, as an involuntary limited-purpose public figure, could sue Brian Good in court and get damages, since Good has demonstrated actual malice in his words and actions.
Civil = burgerlijk (ik sleep je voor de rechter), criminal = crimineel (de politie sleept je voor de rechter). I think you're missing the distinction.
Of course one can obtain damages for defamation. American law simply doesn't imprison people for it. It sounds like you think they should.
Post a Comment
<< Home