Gage 2011: $85,000

As I'm sure I'll be reminded by the kooks, it's not that big a salary in the Bay Area.  But it does represent better than a 5% increase over 2010.  How many people got that kind of a pay increase that year?

One thing that I find rather interesting is that AE911 Troof reported contributions and grants of $288,893, precisely the same amount as in 2010 to the dollar.  Either their donors are remarkably stable, or they're getting all of that income from one source; my guess is the latter.

Box Boy reports putting in an 80-hour workweek again this year; that works out to 11.5 hours a day every day, or 16 hours if he works a normal five-days on, two days off.  All I can say is that it's not evident from his output.

The Pony Remains....

According to the Troofers, not the magistrate:

Charged with not paying his TV licence, Tony Rooke had claimed at Horsham Magistrates’ Court that the BBC’s treatment of the 9/11 attacks made it complicit in acts of terrorism.
He asked to submit evidence which he said would show that the BBC had consistently failed to report the true story.
District Judge Stephen Nicholls said that, even if he accepted and agreed with the evidence, that would not give him grounds to rule that Rooke was not guilty.
He imposed a six month conditional discharge, with £200 legal costs.
Outside court, Rooke said the case had been a ‘score draw’ since the judge had looked at the evidence - albeit in private - and had decided not to fine him.

 It will be interesting to see if Rooke continues to not pay his license fee; by his own logic he would be guilty of supporting a terrorist-supporting organization.  Of course there is always the third option: don't watch television.  I mean, there are so many terrific videos on YouTube exposing the Troofy Troof; why tune into anything else?

The Latest "Breakthrough" Fiasco

The Truthers are still digging for the pony.  It's kind of sad, really, just as that joke is a little sad.  Can you imagine that poor little boy, shoveling out the manure with his hands, only to have his hopes dashed?

The latest breakthrough is a court case.  Finally, the Truthers get to present their evidence to somebody in authority!

On February 25, in the small town of Horsham in the United Kingdom, there will be a rare and potentially groundbreaking opportunity for the 9/11 truth movement. Three hours of detailed 9/11 evidence is to be presented and considered in a court of law where the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) will be challenged over the inaccurate and biased manner in which it has portrayed the events and evidence of 9/11.

There you go!  How could they possibly fail?  Well, basically because there is no pony under the dungheap.  But what makes it so pathetic is when you realize exactly why the Truthers are getting to present their sack of fecal material to the magistrate.

In England, the BBC is actually funded by individual licenses that TV owners pay in order to watch.  The price is pretty expensive: about 145 English pounds or about $220 at current exchange rates.  Mind you, that's just for over the air programming; it's not like our cable TV basic package.  Anyway, as you might expect, a lot of people try to get away without paying the license fee, so they have ways of checking to see if you're watching the telly without paying the fee.

Well, a particularly stupid Troofer named Tony Rooke decided not to pay his license fee and is now going to court over it.  And his defense is that there's a law that provides that you cannot provide funds to an organization that supports terrorism and because the BBC has broadcast shows debunking 9-11 Troofy Troof, it is supporting the terrorism of the real culprits.  No word yet on whom Tony Rooke has fingered as the culprits; whether it's the neocons, Israelis, or Bilderbergers.

And that's how some poor judge in Horsham is going to end up listening to the likes of conspiraloons like the idiot Niels Harrit and Ian Henshall.  Or not, as I personally doubt the magistrate will put up with more than about 15 minutes of this horsecrap before telling the Rookester to pay the fine or go to gaol.

Salon Yanks Goofy Truther Piece

Missed this when it came out, but apparently a writer managed to get a Troofer article published at Salon, but it was quickly "pulled" after a number of caustic tweets.  The article itself is posted here.  He starts off with a weaselly explanation:

My point here was not to endorse the 9/11 Truthers, but to explain them. If there were more transparency in government, if so many questions did not go unanswered, such conspiracy theories would wither and die. I wrote that I was concerned that the 9/11 Truthers would be “tarred with the same ‘crackpot’ brush” as the Sandy Hook conspiracy theorists—the idea being that the latter were crazier than the former. I was right to be concerned, because I am writing this with tar-stained fingers, having been plastered with the stuff for the last 24 hours. And I am not even a Truther.

 As we shall see, that last line is a bunch of horse puckey.   He's a Truther, through and through.  Here's the crucial passage from the article:

What concerns me about the repudiation of the Hookers is that the 9/11 Truthers are being tarred with the same “crackpot” brush. Yes, many of the September Eleventh conspiracy theories are implausible, and too often veer, as conspiracy theories unfortunately tend to do, toward the anti-Semitic. But unlike with Sandy Hook, 9/11 conspiracy theories flow from a scientific fact: whatever the 9/11 Commission Report might claim, fire generated by burning jet fuel is not hot enough to melt steel.

By Hookers, he's talking about the dolts who think that Sandy Hook was a conspiracy by the government to get our guns.  As you can see, he makes the two most common errors in Trutherdom with the whole "jet fuel can't melt steel" claim. First, the jet fuel burned off rather quickly, so while it was the initiating cause of the fire, it was long gone by the time the buildings collapsed.  Second, the fire does not have to melt the steel; it only has to weaken it, and the fires generated by jet fuel which then spread to office equipment was quite adequate to lessen the structural integrity of the building sufficiently to cause a global collapse.

When this latter point is mentioned in the comments, the writer, Greg Olear, responds:

We can all agree that the burning jet fuel in the towers was not hot enough to cause WTC 7 to collapse, though. ; )

So much for his claim that he's not a Truther.  And I do have to chuckle a bit at his horror at the notion that the Sandy Hook nuts are going to discredit the 9-11 fruitcakes.  In fact, as I pointed out last month, many people have called the former "Sandy Hook Truthers"--discrediting them by association with the 9-11 nutbars, not the other way around.

He goes into the usual cui bono bit as well; by this "logic" the French were clearly behind the attack on Pearl Harbor, as they benefited the most from it.  He's a JFK Truther which fits the pattern; if you're stupid enough to fall for one conspiracy theory you'll probably fall for another.

Yet Another Troofer Murderer

And sadly, this one killed his own children before ending his own worthless life:

A pilot who wrote a conspiracy theory book about 9/11 is dead after he shot his two teenage children and family dog before turning the gun on himself.
Relatives and friends of Phillip Marshall were stunned by the violent crime which took place in Calaveras County on Saturday.
Their bodies were discovered when friends of the teens went to the family home on Sandalwood Drive and looked through the windows, they could see 54-year-old Phillip Marshall lying on the floor in a pool of blood.

Predictably, the goofs at 9-11 Flogger don't believe "the official story":

There was a similar killing-made-to-look-like-a-suicide of an agent and family in Berkeley a couple of years ago...

Note that although Steven Jones claims:

Philip was just completing his book, “The Big Bamboozle: 9/11 and the War on Terror.”

Which makes it sound like, gee, maybe the powers that be killed him before he could reveal the Troof, in fact the book had been published in February 2012, and he had previously produced another snoozer called False Flag 9-11 in 2008.

BTW, looks like this kook was keeping at it, unlike Dylan Avery or Professor Jones himself:

The hijackers’ training records from several U.S. flight schools indicate that they were marginal pilots, at best, even in single-engine airplanes. In early 2000, three of the pilot/hijackers are heavily documented at a small flight school near Venice, Florida, while the fourth attended schools in Arizona and California. This would account for the basic flight training of the pilots but in no way can explain the expert level of airmanship required for the 911 hit.

 Marshall wrote that on January 24, 2013, about a week before killing his kids.

Hat Tip: Flouride666 in the comments on the last post.

Art Vandals for 9/11 Truth

One of Gage's gaggle went all nuts recently on a famous painting at the Louvre, not the big one in Paris but a smaller branch:

The 28-year-old woman scribbled "AE911" in permanent marker on a foot long section at the bottom of the painting.

"AE911" is a shortened form of "Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth", a group whose website says they are calling for an inquiry into the World Trade Centre attacks to see whether they were destroyed by explosives. She was immediately seized by a guard and another visitor, and is being questioned by police.

"She appears to be a person with mental health problems," said the local prosecutor, Philippe Peyroux. He also called for the young woman to be examined by a psychiatrist, saying: "She has moments of lucidity and delirious outbursts." 

Judging by the description of the woman, she should pretty much fit right in at the average AE911 Truth meeting.

Fortunately they were able to repair the painting.  H/T to regular reader Guitar Bill for pointing out this bit of nuttiness.