Abby Martin Gets Bent Out of Shape
I enjoyed this one:
Not a big fan of Maddow myself, but she's on the right side in this fight.
posted by Pat @ 9:31 AM
77 comments
As Seen in Vanity Fair's August 2006 Issue!
As Seen in US News & World Report's September 11 Fifth Anniversary Issue!
As Seen in Time Magazine's September 11, 2006 Issue!
As Seen in Phoenix New Times' August 9, 2007 Issue!
Saturday, August 10, 2013
Not a big fan of Maddow myself, but she's on the right side in this fight.
Previous Posts
- Boston Bomber a Truther?
- Coach Kook?
- Psychological Study of Truthers and Debunkers Online
- Pakistani Report on bin Laden Leaked
- The Org Chart From Hell
- Where Did the Money Go Dick?
- Alex Jones Loses it on the BBC
- You Work for Cobra!
- The 9/11 conspiracy theorist who changed his mind
- Scratch Uncle Fetzer....
View My Stats
Allies:
77 Comments:
Heh. Russia Today attacking MSNBC is like a food fight between Pravda and Izvestia.
I was in Palo Alto today, and I have to say, I saw just about the most sad thing in the world. There was a "rally" (I use quotes because there were, at most, a half dozen people there) for 9/11 twoof.
But that's not the sad part. The sad part was the title:
"9/11 Truth and Cookies"
The cookies part was in bold. And that's the most hilarious/sad part -- 9/11 twoofers have to come up with some childish reward to get people to pay attention to them. Most people seem to view them as they are: complete paranoiacs only fit to be ignored.
Like I said, there were only about a half dozen people -- and this was in the middle of the day in downtown Palo Alto. Most people were just walking by, although the group seemed to be trying to attract them with poorly designed banners.
Well, I guess the 9/11 twoof movement has finally died out. It's about time, since it has been moribund for quite some time now.
Where did you get the idea that was a rally, Alec? Were there speakers, marchers, protest signs?
Nope. Just a tiny group of paranoid individuals pretending that they:
1) actually knew what they were talking about
2) were actually making a difference about anything
Of course, by twoofer standards, that makes the event spectacularly successful.
Where did you get the idea that was a rally, Alec? Were there speakers, marchers, protest signs?
Brian, where did you get the idea that there are enough people left who believe in 9/11 truth to hold a rally.
I mean, I could hold a rally demanding that General Zod be appointed to the Supreme Court, but it probably wouldn't get anyone showing up. The same is true for 9/11 truth.
Also, Brian, you probably want to Google General Zod and see what criminal things he was responsible for in Iraq. You wouldn't believe it. Not even people like Allen West will defend him.
BTW, Alec, did you see Brian Good at the rally? Here's a picture:
http://911scholars.ning.com/profile/BrianGood
So, if you saw someone with a hideous homeless mullet wearing clothes that look like they were stolen from the dumpster behind Goodwill, you know it's everyone's favorite unemployed janitor and sex stalker!
You got to love Russian state TV chiding others for propaganda.
OK Alec, so first you claim it was a rally, and then you admit it was not. Thanks for making that clear.
What was said that made you think people didn't know what they were talking about?
Every time people stand up for their free speech rights it makes a difference. The police tried to shut that table down, and the free speech right of the tablers was established. That's making a difference.
Maybe someday someone will put up a statue to commemorate all the cynics who think nothing matters, that nothing can change, that everything is corrupt and that's how it should be. Do you think that's likely? I can picture it myself. It will be fifteen feet tall on a high concrete base, a clear plastic tank of yellow brown water. A fitting memorial to all you heroes, don't you think?
Poor Brian. He's hysterical because nobody gives a shit about what the 5 remaining 9/11 truthers think, so he's babbling about "cynics" and how he's going to change the world.
Brian, you can't even get the widows questions answered. HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!
Lyan, "hysterical" is just a word to you. You use it with no regard to precision or accuracy.
Lyan, "hysterical" is just a word to you. You use it with no regard to precision or accuracy.
False. I use it quite accurately to describe you, since you've built up this delusional universe in which you're a hero who will one day be vindicated, instead of a worthless fuckup who lives with his parents at an age where most normal people become grandparents. Every time I put a dent in this ridiculous world you've created, you get hysterical.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4w8f1HrYqI
Nope, I didn't have the misfortune of seeing Brian at the "rally" (thankfully).
Why do I say they have no clue what they're talking about? Because pretty much every time a twoofer decides to spew verbal refuse all over whoever is unfortunate enough to be in earshot, the utter crap that is produced by their incontinence of the mouth is either completely made up, demonstrates an extreme lack of understanding of basic engineering concepts, is a strawman, is painfully illogical, or a combination of all the features I've already listed.
The "tablers" didn't do shit. They stood in the middle of a public space and (quite cruelly) subjected the people of Palo Alto to their stupidity (as a survivor of the event, I can definitely say the effects of such close proximity to stupidity are quite painful). I have to laugh every time I hear a twoofer with an overinflated ego talk about how he "made a difference" and had some massive impact all because he had the remarkable ability to make a complete fool of himself in a public place.
Being an idiot is not an achievement. I suggest you learn that, Brian.
And maybe someone will make a memorial to all the twoofers in the world. I quite support the idea -- in fact, I already have a basic idea of the memorial planned out: it will be located at the Twin Towers prison in LA (site chosen both for the fitting name and the fitting fact that it houses America's largest mental institution), and will consist of a man sitting in front of a computer, wearing a tinfoil hat and keeping his eyes and ears completely covered (after all, he wouldn't want to be exposed to actual facts -- that might shake his belief in twooferism! The plaque below the memorial will list all the achievements the depicted twoofer has made, including:
-- acting like a complete fool
-- being an obsessed stalker (for da TWOOF!!1!)
-- having the amazing ability to completely suspend his logical thought processes when presented with a conspiracy theory
A fitting memorial to all of you heroes, don't you think?
This comment has been removed by the author.
This comment has been removed by the author.
And Ian -- I have to say that I'm surprised at your statements about General Zod! After all, don't you know that the accusations that General Zod committed the crimes he is accused of are part of a massive false flag operation? I mean, let's look at DA TWOOF!: General Zod had been traveling space for years before he came to Earth, all without ever being detected or destroyed by the (secret) ultra-mega-plasma-missile used by the (also secret) Space Defense Corps! The only way that could be possible is if someone at US Space Command told the space defense personnel to stand down!
Obviously, this indicates the entire attack was faked! The whole thing was just CGI'd, and the people who claim to have seen it were paid off! DAT'S DA TWOOF!!1!
Alec, I'd guess Carol Brouillet was there; 9-11 Truth and Cookies was her idea.
Alec, did Mrs. Brouillet or any of the people at her table "spew verbal refuse all over" you? Did they make anything up? What refuse did they spew? What did they make up?
How was maintaining an informational table subjecting the people of Palo Alto to "their stupidity"? Were people not free to walk on past?
When Mrs. Brouillet challenged the police's attempt to ban her, she made a difference. She made a stand for free speech, and she made it for everyone who wants to use that space.
What have you done to defend the constitutional rights of the people lately?
Alec, I'd guess Carol Brouillet was there; 9-11 Truth and Cookies was her idea.
Well, that would explain Brian's absence, given that it's well known that Brian was stalking her. I'm sure she warned Brian that the police would be there to take him away if he showed up.
What did they make up?
Well, if they're truthers, they made up the whole loony conspiracy theory that 9/11 was an inside job.
Lyan, I have no need to stalk Mrs. Brouillet. I have been to her house many times. I have also been to her tables many times.
Brian, your first incorrect statement was that it was an "informational" table. Like most twoofer gatherings, this one involved as many serious facts as a piece on The Onion.
Which reminds me...
http://www.theonion.com/articles/911-truther-convinced-government-destroyed-past-11,29520/
Alec, I guess you never stopped to peruse any of the 20 books Mrs. Brouillet had for sale, or to ask her about them. She's probably read them all.
Lyan, I have no need to stalk Mrs. Brouillet. I have been to her house many times. I have also been to her tables many times.
Right, and then she learned what a sick, demented pervert you are and now wants nothing to do with you. When was the last time you saw her without getting pepper spray in the face?
Alec, I guess you never stopped to peruse any of the 20 books Mrs. Brouillet had for sale, or to ask her about them. She's probably read them all.
Who cares? My fiancee has read all the Harry Potter books. Maybe you should ask her about them?
Actually, that's not a good idea. I don't need her being stalked by a pathetic old lunatic with a hideous haircut.
Lyan, Carol has never sprayed pepper spray in my face. Last time I saw her was probably five or six weeks ago.
What, is that Alec (he's not a very smart Alec, is he?) claimed that the table was not an informational table. The books alone make it an informational table. The fact that Mrs. Brouillet can discuss them is just gravy.
I've looked at the Harry Potter books. I had a woman friend in NYC who was reading them. I'm not interested in those books, nor in any financee of yours.
Great, we're talking about Carol and Brian's like flies on shit about the subject.
If he's not seriously obsessed about Carol then why is he constantly trying to make a point about her?
Can you answer that Brian.
Also you still haven't looked up my colleague James Logan Howlett about him being a metalergist.
I didn't bring anything up. Alec B did. He said things that weren't true, and I set the record straight. Then Lyin Ian said things that weren't true, and I set the record straight. And in the Boston Bombing thread you said things that weren't true.
You lying clowns make a joke of this website.
OK, Brian, we'll stop talking about your sick, perverted fantasies about Carol Brouillet and discuss something else.
How did you come up with the nickname "punxsutawneybarney"? I'm guessing the "barney" part came from watching "Flintstones" reruns at 3 am while high on glue, but I don't know about "punxsutawney". I figure "Groundhog Day" is too sophisticated for someone of your abysmal intelligence and your 2nd-grade emotional maturity.
Everyone knows, including the Truthers, that you have an obsession with Carol. Don't sit there and lie like that.
LOL hilariously ironic that a konspiracy kook would be critical of someone for “connecting obscure dots” and engaging in “character assassination” cuz she utterly failed to show that Maddow had done either and both tactic are part of the konspiracy kooks SOP. So is taking people out of context is another favored tactic and Martin did so repeatedly. I don’t think she did so intentionally that’s just how he brain works; but was hilarious to see her sarcastically teardown her strawman version of Maddow’s comments. Is it just me or is she consistently annoyingly full of herself ?
I've looked at the Harry Potter books. I had a woman friend in NYC who was reading them.
Did the friendship end after you made a clumsy advance?
Where would you get that idea?
David, what "everyone knows" often ain't so--especially when "everybody" is a bunch of lying peedunkers who don't know enough about 9/11 to make any case at all, and so must resort to lying about people who do know about 9/11.
Lyin thinks "Groundhog Day" is sophisticated. And David Banner thinks the Inculcated Bunk is iconic.
I didn't say Groundhog Day was sophisticated for normal people. I said it was too sophisticated for a failed janitor who calls people "girls". You live in a fantasy world.
Also, Brian, I notice you didn't answer my question. I told Laurie Van Auken that you refuse to answer my questions and she burst into tears.
Why do you mock the widows' pain? What's wrong with you?
More Lyinanity from Lyin Ian.
More Lyinanity from Lyin Ian.
Yup, this is the kind of response I expected from Brian. He's thoroughly defeated, as he knows that 9/11 truth is dead, the widows will never have their questions answered, "meatball on a fork" will never appear in a journal, and there will never be a new investigation.
I mean, you've been posting spam on this blog for 4.5 years now, Brian. What have you accomplished? You're just a subject of endless ridicule and taunting.
David, what "everyone knows" often ain't so--especially when "everybody" is a bunch of lying peedunkers who don't know enough about 9/11 to make any case at all, and so must resort to lying about people who do know about 9/11.
You can squeal all you want Brian. The fact of the matter is that Carol's husband almost got you arrested. Perhaps he should've called the cops, told the cops that you were harassing/stalking and giving them death threats. And you wouldn't be here online. You'd be in a cell with your boyfriend with a limp.
I hope 1 of these days someone spots Brian doing 1 of his "demostrations" walks right up to him and slugs his right in the face.
I think a typical street ass whooping would be appropriate in Brian's case.
Lyin Ian, what I've done on this blog is 1) expose my ideas to counterargument so that they become stronger and clearer, 2) expose most of the commenteers here as very careless liars, 3) demonstrate that you clowns can not (and don't even try to) defeat facts and 4) deny the use of the space to advance peedunker philosophies.
I've done a pretty good job at all of that. All you've got is empty ridicule. For ridicule to be effective, you have to be right.
This comment has been removed by the author.
David, Carol's husband could not get me arrested even if he wanted to (and there's no evidence that he did want to) because I didn't do anything illegal or even anything wrong. I didn't harass or stalk anybody and I didn't make any death threats. Your claims that I did are libelous. I demand that you provide me with your real name and the name of your legal counsel.
You make stuff up and claim "the fact is". Are you 13 years old? Where do you get the idea that I have a boyfriend with a limp? You must be confusing me with someone else
David, Carol's husband could not get me arrested even if he wanted to (and there's no evidence that he did want to) because I didn't do anything illegal or even anything wrong. I didn't harass or stalk anybody and I didn't make any death threats. Your claims that I did are libelous. I demand that you provide me with your real name and the name of your legal counsel.
Actually he could since just about every 1 of your comments about Willie Rodriguez about going on Carol's radio show. He could nail your ass for it and you'd be fucked. I demand you fuck off about my legal situation.
You make stuff up and claim "the fact is". Are you 13 years old? Where do you get the idea that I have a boyfriend with a limp? You must be confusing me with someone else.
Seems like you're the 1 that's 13 yrs. old and you're in you 50's? Hey moron can you read? Your boyfriend IN JAIL has the limp.
On Planet David Banner I can be arrested for suggesting that a debate be hosted on her radio show? Gosh, you're just proving that gamma rays cause brain damage.
Your legal situation is that you are spreading defamatory lies about me. That is libel.
I don't have a boyfriend in jail, I don't have a boyfriend with a limp, and I don't have a boyfriend at all. You must be confusing me with someone else.
On Planet David Banner I can be arrested for suggesting that a debate be hosted on her radio show? Gosh, you're just proving that gamma rays cause brain damage.
And I guess being a sex addict in your mind doesn't qualify any kind of brain damage Brian?
Your legal situation is that you are spreading defamatory lies about me. That is libel.
What lies are there when it's your problem that you've showed you type of behavior to other people. I didn't make you like that, you made yourself like that. You can sit there and say "Libel" all you want. When those cell doors slam home you'll realize you've done and fucked up.
I don't have a boyfriend in jail, I don't have a boyfriend with a limp, and I don't have a boyfriend at all. You must be confusing me with someone else.
Everyone knows you swing both ways Brian. Your posts gives it away about how you like to talk about Willie so much. Even Willie told you to fuck off.
Where do you get the idea that I'm a sex addict in my mind?
David, you clearly know nothing about 9/11. You expend enormous energies fantasizing about me. I didn't do anything illegal or even anything wrong.
I called out Kevin Barrett for the bigot that he is, I called out Willie Rodriguez for the con artist that he is, and I made fools of some of the simple minded folks here at SLC. In doing so I pissed some people off so they lie about me. Fools such as you believe the lies and repeat them and embellish them.
Of course Willie told me to fuck off. He got tired of hearing that he's a con artist, his hero story is a lie, and he steals his glory from the dead.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Brian, you have not "exposed your ideas to counterargument so they become stronger." In order for that to happen, you would actually have to have ideas. As in, ideas that are coherent and logical. Since you have boldly displayed that you do not have that ability, I'd say you haven't "exposed your ideas to counterargument" whatsoever.
You certainly have demonstrated that some people on this blog are idiotic liars who constantly make clowns of themselves, though. The problem is that you are one of those people. How's that whole thing about you vandalizing the Wikipedia page on Chinese gymnasts going? Are you still lying about not doing that?
Your statement that you are preventing this site from espousing "peedunker" philosophies is just sad. The idea that you believe you're actually impacting the way people think and preventing the spread of rational thought by your clownish posts on this site is, to put it mildly, pathetic.
David, you clearly know nothing about 9/11. You expend enormous energies fantasizing about me. I didn't do anything illegal or even anything wrong.
Actually it's you that doesn't know shit about 9/11. Why were you kicked out of the Truth Movement for Brian? Was it because of your sexual behavior?
You expend enormous energies fantasizing a/bout me.
You've got it the other way around. You Googled up David Banner, expecting to get what you believe and in return you got your ass handed to you. Compliments of yours truly.
You do alot of illegal things. Why no one ever put a cap in your ass (bound to happen) sooner is the real question.
What about those widows whose husbands are dead, you don't think you're ripping off the dead?
Alec, what makes you think I don't have ideas that are coherent and logical?
There is no thing about me vandalizing web pages about Chinese gymnasts. I never vandalized any web pages about Chinese gymnasts.
Why would I want to prevent the spread of rational thought? That would be a waste of time.
David, what makes you think I was kicked out the 9/11 Truth movement?
I googled up David Banner to try to verify his claim that he was an architect. I couldn't verify that.
What makes you think I do a lot of illegal things?
What about the widows? I'm not ripping off the widows. But Ian gloats about the fact that they can't get their questions answered.
Lyin Ian, what I've done on this blog is 1) expose my ideas to counterargument so that they become stronger and clearer, 2) expose most of the commenteers here as very careless liars, 3) demonstrate that you clowns can not (and don't even try to) defeat facts and 4) deny the use of the space to advance peedunker philosophies.
Thanks for proving my point. You're a pathetic liar who is constantly ridiculued and does nothing but squeal about "peedunker philosophies". Meanwhile, there will never be another investigation, "meatball on a fork" will never be published in a journal, and most importantly, the widows will never have their questions answered.
Tonight, Brian, I will go to sleep with a smile on my face knowing that the widows questions will not be answered. Then I will go on a magical vacation with my fiancee and I will relax knowing that the widows will never have their questions answered.
How does that make you feel, Brian, knowing that you can do nothing but squeal and squeal over the widows unanswered questions?
David, what makes you think I was kicked out the 9/11 Truth movement?
Because I've personally talked with Carol and Kevin about what you did.
I googled up David Banner to try to verify his claim that he was an architect. I couldn't verify that.
That's because you're a complete idiot.
makes you think I do a lot of illegal things?
Hacking into someones website with their IP Address.
What about the widows? I'm not ripping off the widows.
Sure you are.
Ian, how do you know there will never be an investigation? Who died and left you the One True Ouija Board?
Witnesses could come forward at any time, Congress could decide to revisit the 9/11 Commission's recommendations for action (most of which were never acted upon) and might choose to investigate the basis for some of these recs. I believe that computer models of the collapses will become a very popular subject for Masters and PhD Theses in 15 years or so as inexpensive computer power becomes available all over the world.
There's no need to publish "meatball on a fork" in a journal. It's obvious to anyone who is visually and structurally literate. It's trivial.
Does your financee know that you delight in the widows' pain?
David, you're a liar.
David, you're a liar.
Only a liar would know if a person is truly lying unless the liar is the only liar around to lie.
You haven't proven that I'm not an architect so how can I be a "liar" when you can't prove a damn thing?
I know you're a liar because you make claims that are not true, claims that you can't back up, and claims that you have no right to believe. You lie.
I can't prove a negative. I don't need to prove anything. I soon found that there was no evidence on the internet that there is a David Banner who is an architect. You certainly do not demonstrate any insight or expertise that would lead anyone to believe that you are an architect.
Yes, Brian, because obviously one of the prerequisites to being an architect is to have a webpage that is easily accessible to a mentally challenged lunatic whose investigative skills extend only as far as conducting a Google search.
You vandalized the page on Chinese gymnasts, plain and simple. A computer with your IP address was used to vandalize the page. This demonstrates that you are not only insane enough to take enjoyment out of vandalizing obscure pages on Wikipedia, but also too stupid to use a proxy while doing so.
The fact that you believe a "meatball on a fork" serves as an accurate analogue to a collapsing skyscraper demonstrates your contempt for logical thought.
I know you're a liar because you make claims that are not true, claims that you can't back up, and claims that you have no right to believe. You lie.
You just "know" but aren't sure. You have to be 100$ SURE that I'm a "liar". You just sit there having some made up BS based on just a hunch. Come on Brian, I thought you had a brain between those deaf ears. So I'm not lying based on your "hunch"? Ok I got ya.
I can't prove a negative. I don't need to prove anything. I soon found that there was no evidence on the internet that there is a David Banner who is an architect. You certainly do not demonstrate any insight or expertise that would lead anyone to believe that you are an architect.
You can prove a negative, it's been done before. You just can't think cause you're brain is fucked up. You soon found that David Banner is a Marvel Comics charactor, but you still have to prove that I'm not an architect, you haven't done that yet.
Richard Gage can't demonstrate that he's a structural engineer when he flat out knows all about fire protection in buildings. He's not an expert in structural engineering. I've met him before and he's a pompous ass. He knows nothing about being a structural engineer.
Ian, how do you know there will never be an investigation? Who died and left you the One True Ouija Board?
Witnesses could come forward at any time, Congress could decide to revisit the 9/11 Commission's recommendations for action (most of which were never acted upon) and might choose to investigate the basis for some of these recs. I believe that computer models of the collapses will become a very popular subject for Masters and PhD Theses in 15 years or so as inexpensive computer power becomes available all over the world.
Yup, this is the kind of desperation I expect from a liar and lunatic who has nothing in life except his obsession with a dead conspiracy theory. Hey, maybe there will be new investigations into the murder or Archduke Franz Ferdinand too. I bet a witness could come forward at any minute.
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!
There's no need to publish "meatball on a fork" in a journal.
Right. Scientific journals typically don't publish the scribbles of a mentally ill unemployed janitor.
Does your financee know that you delight in the widows' pain?
Squeal squeal squeal!
Hey Brian, do you think you could change your avatar photo to something of you with your hideous homeless mullet in all its glory?
Your jerk-off photo of Willie Rodriguez is getting old.
Alec, I never vandalized any webpages about gymnasts. You are a liar.
Poor Brian, he's hysterical because he was banned from Wikipedia for vandalism.
Hey Brian, do you think you could change your avatar photo to something of you with your hideous homeless mullet in all its glory?
Your jerk-off photo of Willie Rodriguez is getting old.
Brian, a computer with your IP address was used to vandalize the page. The probability of that happening and you not being the culprit is virtually zero. There is not other explanation other than "Brian Good vandalized the page because he is mentally unstable."
So, what BS claim are you going to make next? That the eEeEeEeEvil government hacked into your computer, set it up as a proxy, and used your IP address to vandalize the page in order to destroy your (already ruined) reputation?
Anyone's computer is open to hackers. Brian thinks that the Government is doing all the hacking, well he's wrong.
There's literally hundreds if not thousands of hackers worldwide. And thinking that 1 person is doing it all, that's narrow minded thinking.
Alec B, you don't know what you're talking about. Where I live, 100 people share the same router and the same IP address. I'm sure that's the case with many other people too. So even if it were my IP address involved in vandalizing that web page, that wouldn't prove anything. And you haven't proven that my IP address vandalized that web page.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Alec B, you don't know what you're talking about. Where I live, 100 people share the same router and the same IP address. I'm sure that's the case with many other people too. So even if it were my IP address involved in vandalizing that web page, that wouldn't prove anything. And you haven't proven that my IP address vandalized that web page.
Poor Brian. He's hysterical because everyone knows he's a pervert who vandalized Wikipedia and was banned. Now he's just lying pathetically, as if anyone would believe his denials.
Brian, nobody believes you any more than anyone believed you when you denied being Petgoat, and when you denied running away squealing and crying from a debate with Willie Rodriguez.
You're not just a liar, you're a really bad liar.
Where I live, 100 people share the same router and the same IP address.
That would be very, very wrong. A router has a different setup than those other 100 people and only 1 computer would have your IP Address Brian.
I know cause my other colleague whose great with computers said so.
If we were to ask Kevin Barrett to provide us with the IP Address: 63.199.155.82 matching your IP Address Brian, you'd be caught lying about hacking into wikipedia.
This comment has been removed by the author.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Why is an architect babbling about IP addresses, something he obviously knows nothing about, instead of architecture?
Where do you get the idea that 63.199.155.82 is my IP address? My IP address is not 63.199.155.82, and even if it were, I share a router with a hundred computers. We all have the same IP address.
Why would you believe Kevin Barrett's claims about my IP address? When did Barrett become an expert on IP addresses? Barrett is a liar. You can see his interview with Russia Today on youtube for 9/11/09. Barrett lies four times in the first five minutes of that interview.
Where do you get the idea that I hacked into wikipedia? Why would I want to do that? Who neds to hack wikipedia? Any fool can edit it, even you.
Brian, the probability that someone has both your IP address and your obsession with Willie Rodriguez is minimal. It ranks along with magic thermite elves destroying the WTC in terms of its improbability.
Of course, the one thing you know how to do is lie, so you're going to continue lying about this particular fact.
Yeah totally ignore my colleague which knows about computers Brian. Se you overlook every detail and never really read anything useful.
Guess your reading comprehension really sucks don't it?
This comment has been removed by the author.
The lying liar lies, "...Where do you get the idea that 63.199.155.82 is my IP address? My IP address is not 63.199.155.82, and even if it were, I share a router with a hundred computers. We all have the same IP address."
You "share" the 63.199.155.82 IP address?
Bullshit.
Remember me, liar? As an information technology expert, I've forgotten more about Internet protocol (IP) than you'll ever know.
For example, have you ever heard of a DNS/BIND utility called 'nslookup'? 'nslookup' is a debugging tool provided by the DNS/BIND software package (DNS/BIND is the the Internet's foundation). It allows anyone to directly query a name server and retrieve information known to the Domain Name Service (DNS) system. From the command line 'nslookup' is used to query the IP address of a host.
Hence, from my desktop computer's UNIX command prompt we find the following:
$ nslookup 63.199.155.82
Server: dns1.snfcca.xxxxx.xxx
Name: adsl-63-199-155-82.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net
Address: 63.199.155.82
We can see that your IP Address, 63.199.155.82, translates to the following host name:
adsl-63-199-155-82.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net
So, you're trying to convince us that a "router" uses asymmetric DSL (ADSL) and thin client naming conventions???????????
Bullshit.
FACT: Routers don't use ADSL (not enough bandwidth), thin clients use ADSL. A router, moreover, is NEVER assigned a thin client host name.
Routers are named BY CONVENTION as follows:
sl-bb10-dc.sprint.net
which translates to "SprintLink Backbone 10 router in Washington, DC."
Thus, 63.166.155.82 is NOT a routers' IP address, it's a thin client host address, as the naming conventions used by Pacbell's DNS administrator PROVES beyond a doubt. Thus, YOU DON'T SHARE THAT IP ADDRESS WITH ANYONE. IT'S A DEDICATED IP ADDRESS ASSIGNED TO ONE COMPUTER (your computer) AND ONE COMPUTER ONLY.
You lie first, last and always.
Face it, liar, you were caught red-handed vandalizing the Chinese Gymnastic team's Wikipedia entry. The email headers from an exchange between you and Carol Brouillet proves that you use the 63.199.155.82 IP address
Thus, you stand exposed once again as a scurrilous liar, Internet vandal and degenerate sex stalker.
Par for the course. I take my wife and kids on vacation and when I return nothing has changed. You lie constantly -- and no matter how many times you're caught lying you continue to tell the same lies as though you were never exposed as a liar.
You, Brian Good, are a degenerate liar with the morals of a street-walking whore.
Once again, you FAIL, liar.
Now get out of here -- you incompetent, lying homosexual.
Adios, puto!
Post a Comment
<< Home