Truthers Blow Lid Off Of New World Order
A pair of prominent Truthers have finally accomplished their dream, uncovering some of those secret operatives behind the American Empire. After years of spinning their wheels and making vague accusations against people like Dick Cheney (like that one was hard to call) they have now exposed the secret life of... Ben Affleck.
Argo, Ben Affleck's blockbuster film and this year's Academy Award-winner for Best Picture, is nothing more than a propaganda piece developed to incite hatred of Iran.
At least that's what some conspiracy theorists have posited. And as BuzzFeed first reported, they believe that Affleck, in addition to his day job in Hollywood, may also be a secret government operative.
Writing for Iranian state news agency PressTV on Wednesday, Kevin Barrett presented a dubious case to support that claim. Citing a "leading [expert] on ultra-secretive covert operations," but offering no hard evidence, Barrett ripped the film and wondered if Affleck should be "brought to justice" for his role in producing it.
"If the makers of Argo are deposed under oath, they may be forced to reveal that their film — like the fictitious film-within-the-film — is a covert operation disguised as a movie," he wrote. Barrett's expert is Barbara Honegger, a former Bush and Reagan staffer with a reputation for promoting conspiracies based on scant evidence.
In her book October Surprise, she claims that officials close to Reagan colluded with Iran to prolong the infamous hostage crisis until after the 1980 election, in a deliberate attempt to weaken incumbent Jimmy Carter.
I just want to know how Gigli fits into all of this. Explain Gigli!
posted by James B. @ 9:43 AM
76 comments
76 Comments:
Can you find any evidence that Kevin Barrett has any standing in the truth movement? Yes, Press TV has signed him on. He seems to have no footprint beyond that.
Can you find any evidence that Kevin Barrett has any standing in the truth movement?
One Truther is as good as another. The similarities between Jon Gold and Judy Wood outweigh the differences.
Yes, I am very familiar with the "No True Truther" fallacy.
So James, I'll suppose it's your unwillingness to indulge the "no true debunker" fallacy that causes you to tolerate the absurdities put forth by MGF and UtterFail and Ian, like Ian's repeated claims that there are no widows.
So would you consider the confabulator MGF and the liars GutterBall and Ian to be good debunkers or what?
Also, it seems that no one can find any evidence that Dr. Barrett has any standing in the truth movement. He's been exposed as a bigot, a liar, and an advocate of violence.
"Can you find any evidence that Kevin Barrett has any standing in the truth movement? "
The Truth movement has no standing, so who cares?
"So would you consider the confabulator MGF and the liars GutterBall and Ian to be good debunkers or what?"
We don't debunk anything, you and the other assfaces have yet to present any plausible evidence that 9/11 didn't happen the way it happened.
The burden of proof is on the troofers, and they have yet to even try to present a professional assessment of their various claims in an adult, let alone professional manner.
"Also, it seems that no one can find any evidence that Dr. Barrett has any standing in the truth movement. He's been exposed as a bigot, a liar, and an advocate of violence. "
All troofers are liars, biggots, and many high-profile individuals have committed murder. All the proof we need.
As for the Barrett piece itself, what a sad joke.
The CIA doesn't need to "whip up" anti-Iranian sentiment. Iran does enough of that on their own.
Whatever Barrett's standing maybe it certainly is many times that of Brian Good.
"He's been exposed as a bigot, a liar, and an advocate of violence."
So he should fit right in, note the number of Holocaust deniers in the movement and the number of 'reasonable' truthers who collaborated with them.
MGF, thanks for demonstrating that you can not show that Kevin Barrett has any standing in the truth movement. From appearing on Fox News he has moved now to Press TV by way of Russia Today. In his 2009 interview with RT he lied four times in the first four minutes.
Thanks for admitting that you and GutterBall and Ian don't debunk anything. Thanks for your irrational claim that there is no “plausible evidence that 9/11 didn't happen the way it happened.”
I don't think anyone is claiming that there is any such evidence.
The burden of proof is only to show that the official reports are inadequate—and they are inadequate on the face. The 9/11 Commission failed to answer 273 of the widows' questions. NIST gave us only half a report, and by cutting off their analysis at the moment of collapse initiation, they left out the ten essential mysteries of the towers' demise.
It appears you are not aware of the many videos of professional engineers at the ae911truth youtube channel providing their professional concerns about the issues.
I am not a liar, a bigot or a holocaust denier. No high-profile 9/11 Truther has ever committed murder. You are a liar, MGF.
Len, please name the holocaust deniers in the movement and detail the collaborations of reasonable truthers with them. Let's short-cut this. Do you have any evidence that Eric Williams is a current member of the truth movement?
What a shock to see Brian posting hysterical spam in a post about Kevin Barrett. Brian, of course, is humiliated by the fact that Kevin Barrett is a serious scholar being quoted in the news, while Brian is a failed janitor who gets humiliated by my mocking his hideous haircut and his homosexual obsession with Willie Rodriguez.
Brian, you were banned from the truth movement for being a liar and a sex predator. Kevin Barrett was not banned. Thus, he has standing in the movement, and you do not.
You can squeal all you want about that, but it doesn't change the fact that you've failed again. Given that you're an unemployed janitor who lives with his parents, you should be pretty used to failure by now.
Also, Brian, the widows have no questions. I've proven this many times, and yet you refuse to learn.
Ian, your belief that Dr. Barrett is a serious scholar is not supported by the evidence. He lied four times in four minutes on Russia Today. His books "Truth Jihad" and "Questioning the War on Terror" are silly. He claims he has lost an academic career because of his opinions about 9/11, but his demonstrated incompetence makes it easy to see why he had no academic career.
Ian, your persistent libeling of me is quite puzzling. Why bother?
I guess I've finally come to understand your persistent assertion that the widows have no questions. Clearly you make this claim as a legal defense, so you can claim that ALL of your lies are just comedy and therefore not libel.
Ian, your belief that Dr. Barrett is a serious scholar is not supported by the evidence. He lied four times in four minutes on Russia Today. His books "Truth Jihad" and "Questioning the War on Terror" are silly. He claims he has lost an academic career because of his opinions about 9/11, but his demonstrated incompetence makes it easy to see why he had no academic career.
Nobody cares.
Ian, your persistent libeling of me is quite puzzling. Why bother?
Truth is not libel, Brian. Also, I enjoy humiliating you.
I guess I've finally come to understand your persistent assertion that the widows have no questions. Clearly you make this claim as a legal defense, so you can claim that ALL of your lies are just comedy and therefore not libel.
My, such squealing!
Also, nobody cares about your "widows".
Also, Brian, your list of essential mysteries is incorrect. The correct essential mysteries are the mushroom cloud, the vaporized steel, the radiation in the dust, the burnt baboon fur found in the wreckage, and the streaks of light seen as the towers collapsed.
Yes, Barrett is not a serious scholar and is a bigot. So are Gage, Griffin, Jones et al. It makes him the perfect fit.
Ian, truth is not libel--correct. Thus when I point out that your buddy Dr. Kevin Barrett is a liar, a bigot, and an advocate of violence, I am not libeling him because what I say is true. And when I point out that William Rodriguez is a lying con artist who stole his phony hero story from a true hero, Pablo Ortiz, I am not libeling Willie, because what I say is true.
You are libeling me because you are lying. Also, you've presented no evidence of baboon fur in the dust. You seem to think the death of 3000 people in the towers is a matter for comedy.
Ian, truth is not libel--correct. Thus when I point out that your buddy Dr. Kevin Barrett is a liar, a bigot, and an advocate of violence, I am not libeling him because what I say is true. And when I point out that William Rodriguez is a lying con artist who stole his phony hero story from a true hero, Pablo Ortiz, I am not libeling Willie, because what I say is true.
Nobody cares.
You are libeling me because you are lying.
False.
Also, you've presented no evidence of baboon fur in the dust.
False.
You seem to think the death of 3000 people in the towers is a matter for comedy.
I don't. I think you're a matter for comedy, since you're a mentally ill unemployed janitor who believes in magic thermite elves.
You lie and lie and lie and lie. You seem to think that's funny.
Poor Brian. He's squealing hysterically because I've humiliated him again by pointing out that the widows have no questions, and that his list of essential mysteries is wrong.
It thinks it's funny. So sad.
Once again Brian's mental illness is on full display. First he writes:
"Thanks for your irrational claim that there is no “plausible evidence that 9/11 didn't happen the way it happened.”
I don't think anyone is claiming that there is any such evidence."
Then proceeds to claim 9/11 didn't happen the way it did.
"The burden of proof is only to show that the official reports are inadequate—and they are inadequate on the face. The 9/11 Commission failed to answer 273 of the widows' questions. NIST gave us only half a report, and by cutting off their analysis at the moment of collapse initiation, they left out the ten essential mysteries of the towers' demise."
There is a demonstration of the lack of independent though, all of Gage's talking points are present in this statement. Brian is incapable of thinking, and therefore reasoning for himself. He is a follower. Always has been and always will be.
And Brian calls me "it", like Buffalo Bill from "Silence of the Lambs". It kind of makes sense, since both Brian and Buffalo Bill wear women's clothing, live in their parents' house, have no friends, have homosexual obsessions, etc. etc.
Let's just hope that chunky young women don't start going missing in the Bay Area.
MGF, I have never claimed that anything happened that did not happen. I leave that kind of nonsense to youse guys, who claim the widows got answers, who claim that the collapses of the buildings were thoroughly investigated.
Did it ever occur to you that Mr. Gage might use my talking points instead of the other way around?
Ian, unlike you I am not an expert in slasher movies.
Nobody cares about your widows and nobody cares about your delusional "essential mysteries". Also, nobody cares whether a con artist like Gage ripped off his ideas from a lunatic failed janitor.
Also, "The Silence of the Lambs" is not a slasher film. You live in a fantasy world.
"Did it ever occur to you that Mr. Gage might use my talking points instead of the other way around?"
Yeah, Brian, I hear his next film is going to be called 9-11:Rake On Rake.
The rake-on-rake model very well expresses an important point--which is probably exactly why it's subjected to so much ridicule.
Oh, and what happened to Wizzie LiedRugAs? It seems he doesn't come around any more after he went to Iran to flog his basement "exploshuns!" one more time.
I wonder how that trick with the $1 bill that he can make look like a $20 bill is working out for him.
The rake-on-rake model very well expresses an important point--which is probably exactly why it's subjected to so much ridicule.
It does express an important point: that Brian Good is mentally ill, which is probably why he's unemployed and lives with his parents, and why his avatar is of that "strutting, bragging, lying, hot sexy hunk of latin manhood", Willie Rodriguez.
BTW, Brian, you still haven't provided any evidence that the widows exist, thus your claim that they have questions is not logical.
How does the rake on rake model express the allegation that I am mentally ill? In what way does it fail to express its legitimate point?
I have many times provided evidence that the widows exist. You're a liar, Ian.
My work is done.
Your work was done before you even started, years ago. You never had any command of the facts. You live in a fantasy world of erroneous ideologically-based assumptions compounded by your deep emotional need to feel superior to everyone else.
You never actually did any work here. All you accomplished was to discredit your belief system and make a fool of yourself.
...and my work is paying dividends re: Brian's latest spectacular melt down. Buwhahahahahahaah...
How does the rake on rake model express the allegation that I am mentally ill? In what way does it fail to express its legitimate point?
See what I mean? You think the rake on rake "model" has a legitimate point. Thus, you're mentally ill.
I have many times provided evidence that the widows exist.
False.
Your work was done before you even started, years ago. You never had any command of the facts. You live in a fantasy world of erroneous ideologically-based assumptions compounded by your deep emotional need to feel superior to everyone else.
You never actually did any work here. All you accomplished was to discredit your belief system and make a fool of yourself.
Squeal squeal squeal!
Hey Brian, have the widows had their questions answered yet?
HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!
I seem to have missed my melt-down, MGF. When did that happen?
Ian, the rake-on-rake model has a legitimate point. That is to show that far from resembling a piledriver pounding a piling (and who ever heard of a piledriver that disintegrated its piling in a single blow anyway?) the interaction between a falling top block and the lower structure would include a lot of missed hits and a lot of friction.
Thus it would more resemble a little rake hitting a big rake than a piledriver hitting a pile. If you had bothered to read the text in the link instead of just looking at the pictures, you would know this.
Thanks for yet again demonstrating your boorishness in celebrating the widows' frustration.
I seem to have missed my melt-down, MGF. When did that happen?
You were squealing hysterically above out of humiliation over the failure of the truth movement.
Ian, the rake-on-rake model has a legitimate point. That is to show that far from resembling a piledriver pounding a piling (and who ever heard of a piledriver that disintegrated its piling in a single blow anyway?) the interaction between a falling top block and the lower structure would include a lot of missed hits and a lot of friction.
Thanks for proving my point. You don't understand a thing about what happened on 9/11, which is to be expected because you're a mentally ill unemployed janitor.
Thus it would more resemble a little rake hitting a big rake than a piledriver hitting a pile. If you had bothered to read the text in the link instead of just looking at the pictures, you would know this.
Oh, we read the text. It's a hilarious demonstration of your mental illness.
Thanks for yet again demonstrating your boorishness in celebrating the widows' frustration.
Poor Brian. I've humiliated him again by demonstration that he still hasn't gotten a single question from the widows answered. Not one.
Ian, you humiliate only yourself.
Poor Brian, he's reduced to "I know you are but what am I?" because he knows the truth movement is dead and he's a failed janitor who lives with his parents.
Ian, you lie.
Poor Brian. He has nothing left to say because I've humiliated and defeated him.
I bet if Brian was banned from posting on this blog he'd have no where to go to call people girls, liars ect.
Hmmmm imagine the silence we'd have from Brian's spamming.
IOW, TAW, if not for me bringing some life to this place, the peedunker movement would be dead.
Ian, you don't have the power to humiliate a TeleTubbies doll.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Oh, I can't humiliate you?
Please identify all of the widows questions you have gotten answered.
Please identify the journals that have published "rake on rake".
Please update us on the status of the new government investigation into 9/11.
IOW, TAW, if not for me bringing some life to this place, the peedunker movement would be dead.
This is true. After all, the truth movement is dead, so nobody would be posting here if Brian weren't still, after 4 years here, posting the same spam about modified attack baboons, magic thermite elves, and invisible widows. Naturally, many of us stick around to point and laugh at him for this, as well as for things like the fact that he's unemployed and lives with his parents, or his hideous haircut, or the fact that he was banned from the truth movement.
You're silly, Ian. The fact that the questions have not been answered proves MY point, not yours. The questions need answers.
The energies you spend lying about 9/11 and about me are a waste of time. A normal person would recognize that.
TAW, if not for me bringing some life to this place, the peedunker movement would be dead.
Actually you're wrong. Look at the Loose Change forum, it's dead and we're still here. Dumbass!
Funny how Brian says that the 9/11 Families questions "haven't been asked" when the 9/11 Commission was founded by the 4 widows, aka Jersey Girls, who had their questions answered by the same Commission they started.
IRONY!
TAW, you're lying. The widows asked the 9/11 Commission 300 questions. They only got 27 answers.
The Loose Change forum has died and been reborn a couple of times. A couple of years ago is was being dominated by CIT-heads. I guess when CIT was shown to be full of $h!t their crowd kinda lost interest and wandered off to play with their X-boxes or whatever.
You're silly, Ian. The fact that the questions have not been answered proves MY point, not yours. The questions need answers.
Nobody cares if the questions are answered.
The energies you spend lying about 9/11 and about me are a waste of time. A normal person would recognize that.
False. I am entertained by your hysterical humiliation.
TAW, you're lying. The widows asked the 9/11 Commission 300 questions. They only got 27 answers.
Nobody cares.
The Loose Change forum has died and been reborn a couple of times. A couple of years ago is was being dominated by CIT-heads. I guess when CIT was shown to be full of $h!t their crowd kinda lost interest and wandered off to play with their X-boxes or whatever.
And when the truth movement was shown to be full of shit, the crowd kinda lost interest and wandered off to play with their X-Boxes. Except for you, of course. You're too poor to afford an X-Box. You can't even afford a normal haircut. HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!
TAW, you're lying. The widows asked the 9/11 Commission 300 questions. They only got 27 answers.
I'm not the one going around and said that they NEVER got their questions answered when they actually got 27 of the MOST IMPORTANT questions of theirs answered by the Commission they brought into being by their own means.
The Loose Change forum has died and been reborn a couple of times.
Yeah, kind of like Dylan Avery's films that he messed up 4 times, right?
Let's see how far the Truthers got to coming up with 100,000 signatures for a new independent investigation on 9/11:
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/reinvestigate-collapse-wtc-building-7-911-never-has-steel-frame-building-collapsed-due-office-fires/K3Yfqnph
Only 112 signatures and they need 99,888 by April 10, 2013?
They ain't gonna make the deadline. HAHAHAHA!
Ian, the widows care about the questions. How can you say that the victims of 9/11 are nobody?
You delude yourself. I am not humiliated, the truth movement is not fos, and I could afford two haircuts and two X-boxes if I had time for them,
TAW, 273 of the widows' 300 questions remain unanswered. 91%. Upon what basis do you evaluate the 27 that have been answered as "MOST IMPORTANT"? I can tell you right now: no basis at all.
I wouldn't sign a whitehouse.gov petition. I never heard of that petition except here. Who set it up? Who's promoting it? Was it set up to fail?
Ian, the widows care about the questions. How can you say that the victims of 9/11 are nobody?
The widows have no questions.
You delude yourself. I am not humiliated, the truth movement is not fos, and I could afford two haircuts and two X-boxes if I had time for them.
Poor Brian. He's hysterical because I humiliated him by pointing out that the truth movement is dead, and that Brian is a failed janitor who lives with his parents and can't afford a normal haircut.
TAW, 273 of the widows' 300 questions remain unanswered. 91%. Upon what basis do you evaluate the 27 that have been answered as "MOST IMPORTANT"? I can tell you right now: no basis at all.
Nobody cares.
I wouldn't sign a whitehouse.gov petition. I never heard of that petition except here. Who set it up? Who's promoting it? Was it set up to fail?
My, such squealing!
Let's remember that it's been over 4 years since Brian started spamming this board about invisible widows with "questions", and he STILL hasn't provided a shred of evidence that the widows exist, or that they have questions.
Ian, you continue to lie. I've never spammed about invisible widows, and I've proven many times that the widows exist. You've been repeating these same juvenile jokes for years, and you've driven the serious posters away from this board (remember Sackcloth and Ashes?) with your embarrassing twaddle.
TAW, 273 of the widows' 300 questions remain unanswered. 91%. Upon what basis do you evaluate the 27 that have been answered as "MOST IMPORTANT"? I can tell you right now: no basis at all.
Like I said in another thread, you're debunking yourself. You claim that none of their questions got answered and yet you said they had 27 questions answered.
You just like debunking your own paranoia about those widows Brian?
I never said none of their questions got answered. I said they got 27 answers to 300 questions. I said their questions about Behrooz Sarshar never got answered.
You're picking imaginary nits. Do you have meth-mites or something?
I never said none of their questions got answered. I said they got 27 answers to 300 questions. I said their questions about Behrooz Sarshar never got answered.
Let me break down this hilarious post of Brian debunking himself.
I never said none of their questions got answered.
Brian lied about that because in the next sentence he states:
I said they got 27 answers to 300 questions.
How can they NOT get their questions answered when indeed they got 27 of them answered?
And last but not least here comes the sentence of a person I never brought up to begin with:
I said their questions about Behrooz Sarshar never got answered.
Brian's effectivly trying to evade the fact that he's debunking himself.
You're picking imaginary nits. Do you have meth-mites or something?
When in doubt of debunking yourself and getting caught doing it change the subject.
OWNED!
They can NOT get their 273 answered when they are NOT answered.
If your landlord wants $300, do you give him $27 and try to claim you've paid your rent?
They can NOT get their 273 answered when they are NOT answered.
Who cares Brian. You've never really stated which questions were answered.
You like beating a dead horse don't ya?
If your landlord wants $300, do you give him $27 and try to claim you've paid your rent?
Must be sad to get mad to know you've debunked yourself huh?
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/01/us/9-11-widows-skillfully-applied-the-power-of-a-question-why.html
Proof that the 9/11 Commission was started by the Jersey Girls:
"They call me all the time," said Thomas H. Kean, the commission's chairman and a former Republican governor of New Jersey. "They monitor us, they follow our progress, they've supplied us with some of the best questions we've asked. I doubt very much if we would be in existence without them."
Here's 1 question that the Jersey Girls always asked but got no answer to and Brian fails to show:
But they had a burning question. "We simply wanted to know why our husbands were killed," Ms. Breitweiser said, "why they went to work one day and didn't come back."
I see you're aping Ian's tactic: make an absurd claim, and then when it's shown to be absurd, say nobody cares.
There's nothing dead about the horse. The fact remains that the widows' 300 questions only got 27 answers--and that fact will go through history as a fact until the questions are answered.
I see you're aping Ian's tactic: make an absurd claim, and then when it's shown to be absurd, say nobody cares.
It's been 12 yrs Brian and they've had their questions answered by their own commission that they've headed up. Nothing absurd about it, but then again I'm debating with a total moron who ain't got nothing to prove other than he skipped taking his meds.
There's nothing dead about the horse. The fact remains that the widows' 300 questions only got 27 answers--and that fact will go through history as a fact until the questions are answered.
The fact is who cares but you and they had their questions answered and there's not a damn thing you can do about it. Speaking of which you've never helped them get their "300 questions" answered. Instead you're sitting there typing away on your computer arguing with us on this blog and you call us everything under the sun but you won't lift a finger to do anything?
Until you actually help the widows with their questions Brian you have failed proving that their questions were never answered. Despite that they did have 27 questions answered, they still got their questions answered reguardless of how much you pursuade that they didn't get them answered.
Like I said, you're beating a dead horse.
TAW, 273 questions remain unanswered. Your claim that they were answered is absurd.
Certainly I can do something about it--most people don't know that the widows' questions weren't answered and when they learn that's so, they'll be concerned.
I'm doing it right here. I'm exposing you for the fool you for anybody who cares to read it.
Your claim that they were answered is absurd.
How can it be "absurd" when you admitted that 27 of them were answered shit of brains?
Certainly I can do something about it.
No you can't otherwise you would've done it already you liar.
I'm exposing you for the fool you for anybody who cares to read it.
I care not to read it cause I know you're beating a dead horse and you've debunked yourself.
most people don't know that the widows' questions weren't answered and when they learn that's so, they'll be concerned.
12 yrs later and not a single person doesn't look concerned about it. So you lost!
What's absurd is for you to think that 27 answers to 300 questions means the questions were answered. You wouldn't expect to buy a $30,000 car for $2,700 would you?
Who made you God and gave you the power to declare a 12-year time limit? History will answer the questions, and history will note that they were not answered in a timely manner.
What's absurd is for you to think that 27 answers to 300 questions means the questions were answered.
They were answered and you think none of them did get answered. That was my point numbnuts.
You wouldn't expect to buy a $30,000 car for $2,700 would you?
Still butt hurt about the whole debunking yourself with the widows comment aren't you?
Who made you God and gave you the power to declare a 12-year time limit?
Father Time!
History will answer the questions, and history will note that they were not answered in a timely manner.
Sure, let us know when that breakthrough comes into being. 12 yrs. later and nothing in the history books yet.
What's the matter Brian, hiding from the fact that you just got your ass handed to you again?
You use the widows as an excuse to hide the fact that you have nothing to offer. You're just like the terrorist, you use the widows as human shields from your failures.
I wonder what it would be like for you to come face to face with all the widows you shamelessly talk about. I wonder if you'd be scared or run away or act completely different in front of them. One things for sure, you would be a coward in front of them.
" History will answer the questions, and history will note that they were not answered in a timely manner. "
History already has answered most of them. They were groundless. The rest will eventually be revealed, but while they will fill in the picture they won't change the story.
You lose.
27 questions were answered. The 273 were not. You're as silly as Ian, claiming that answering 9% of the questions is "answering the questions". You might as well claim that if 4.5% of the voters chose you, that "the voters chose me". The only ass you're handing anyone is your own.
Why should I be afraid of the widows? You should be afraid of the widows. You are obstructing their quest for truth and justice.
MGF, you don't even know what the questions are. Your claims that they have already been answered and that they are groundless are a fairy tale you tell yourself to protect your complacency.
Post a Comment
<< Home