Truther Interrupts Super Bowl Press Conference
And no, it wasn't Pete Carroll. Surprised I missed this until now, given the wall to wall coverage we have been enjoying up here in Seattle.
Exit question, would he have tried this on Richard Sherman?
posted by James B. @ 6:03 AM
37 comments
37 Comments:
Congrats on your team's win, James, although if that one ref call had gone the other way.... they might only have won by 30 points. ;)
What if Al Davis was behind 9/11?
Needs to be pointed out that this guy got through incredibly tight security to do what he did.
Proof that the toughest security in the world is no match for an asshole on a mission.
Yeah, it was pretty precarious there for a while. Heck, it was tied for the first 11 seconds. ;-)
After the horrible officiating in Super Bowl XL we should have got to play with 12 men on the field for the first half or something as compensation. Not that the outcome would have been much different.
The twoofer was probably a distraught Broncos fan.
Hey, no Brian Good comments. Did he finally go off and get a life?
James, did you never consider that Coach Carroll might have got that guy in there as a friend?
No, because that would be stupid.
It would be stupid for Coach Carroll to get that guy in there as a friend?
Or it would be stupid to consider it?
Which?
James, did you never consider that Coach Carroll might have got that guy in there as a friend?
Oh my god....
Everything is a conspiracy, isn't it Brian?
This comment has been removed by the author.
I never said that. Coach Carroll is widely believed to be a 9/11 truther. Is getting a friend into the proceedings a conspiracy?
The question was--how did they guy get into the proceedings? I offered a reasonable vector.
James said that was stupid, but refuses to be clear on whether he meant it would be a) stupid for Carroll to get his friend in, or b) it would be stupid for someone wondering how the guy got in to consider that maybe Carroll had a hand in it.
B makes no sense, because what's stupid about considering all the angles? A makes no sense either because 1) Carroll might not agree with James that getting the guy in was stupid and 2) even if it were stupid, that doesn't mean it didn't happen.
I never said that. Coach Carroll is widely believed to be a 9/11 truther. Is getting a friend into the proceedings a conspiracy?
Yes.
The question was--how did they guy get into the proceedings? I offered a reasonable vector.
He actually explained that very thing. None of it included Coach Carroll. But now that you have that belief cemented in your head it will no doubt stay there regardless of the facts, as always.
James said that was stupid, but refuses to be clear on whether he meant it would be a) stupid for Carroll to get his friend in, or b) it would be stupid for someone wondering how the guy got in to consider that maybe Carroll had a hand in it.
Anyone with an IQ over 50 would know he meant both.
So on Planet GMS we can know that a) Coach Curtis did not get the truther in as a friend because that would be stupid and Coach Curtis would never do anything stupid and b) there's no point in considering that Coach Curtis might get the truther in as a friend because that would be stupid and Coach Curtis would never do anything stupid.
Is this belief based on the belief that nobody ever does anything stupid and thus nothing stupid ever happens?
Is this belief based on the belief that Coach Carroll in particular is incapable of doing anything stupid and thus there's no point in considering that maybe he did?
I want to know how your mind works.
It's amusing to watch Brian babble about Pete Carroll. See, Brian has no job and has no friends, so in his malfunctioning mind, it wouldn't seem odd that someone with a high-paying, prestigious job would risk it in order to have some lunatic interrupt his own team's press conference.
Please leave the analysis to those of us who can function normally in society, Brian.
So Ian thinks that the coach who just won the Superbowl is going to get fired for getting a friend ("How could I know he was going to do that?") through the barricade?
No surprise there. Ian will always will be a beanie-head.
So Ian thinks that the coach who just won the Superbowl is going to get fired for getting a friend ("How could I know he was going to do that?") through the barricade?
Thanks for proving my point. You have no job and no friends, so you have no idea how people with jobs or friends behave.
No surprise there. Ian will always will be a beanie-head.
Can someone translate this into "sane", please?
And Ian doesn't even know what a beanie-head is. More evidence that any idiot can (and does) get an MBA.
It's stupid because beyond the delusions of a few truthers, it has no basis in reality.
You didn't define "it". I warned y'all that your tolerance for Lyin Ian's lies were going to corrode your minds.
Poor Brian. He's babbling like the mental 8-year-old he is, calling people "beanie heads".
Also, per the last thread, Bill Deagle is a renowned truther and a leading researcher in the movement. You would know this if you hadn't been banned from the truth movement for being a liar and a sex stalker.
Ian, where do you get the idea that Bill Deagle is a renowned truther? At what conferences has he appeared? What books has he written?
Poor beanie head Ian is so clueless he doesn't even know he's a beanie head.
Ian, where do you get the idea that Bill Deagle is a renowned truther? At what conferences has he appeared? What books has he written?
C'mon Brian, there are many, many videos of Deagle speaking on many topics. Learn to Google.
Also, he wrote the authoritative book on how modified attack baboons planted micro-nukes in the WTC towers. The essential mysteries, along with the evidence from the testing of the chips done by Dr. Szanitiy, prove him right. The fact that you know none of this shows why you're so confused about 9/11.
Poor beanie head Ian is so clueless he doesn't even know he's a beanie head.
Brian babbles 'bout beanies! Brian babbles 'bout beanies!
Brian, it was far more fun when you called me "she" or "it" or "skidmark". You can call me whatever you want, but it doesn't change the fact that the widows have no questions, and that you're a failed janitor with a hideous haircut.
Ian, any fool can post youtube videos. That doesn't make him a renowned truther.
What is the title of Dr. Deagle's book?
You lie and lie and lie. You seem to think that lying about 9/11 is funny. You and Dr. Barrett have a lot in common.
Ian, any fool can post youtube videos. That doesn't make him a renowned truther.
What is the title of Dr. Deagle's book?
You lie and lie and lie. You seem to think that lying about 9/11 is funny. You and Dr. Barrett have a lot in common.
What is the title of Dr. Deagle's book?
I'll tell you when you admit that you are petgoat.
You lie and lie and lie. You seem to think that lying about 9/11 is funny. You and Dr. Barrett have a lot in common.
My, such squealing!
Poor Brian. He's humiliated because a group like 9/11 truth doesn't want failed janitors who stalk people in the group. They only want renowned researchers like Bill Deagle, Jim Fetzer, and Kevin Barrett.
Ian, Kevin Barrett is not a renowned researcher. He made ludicrous errors in his claims about the Nuremberg trials on a 50,000-watt AM radio station.
He made ludicrous claims about a respected Egyptian journalist recently on RT.
You provide no evidence that Dr. Deagel is renowned in the Truth movement.
I don't remember being kicked out of the Scholars for 9/11 truth. I posted there for a while out of curiosity. There were so few participants (about as many as participate here, actually) and Dr. Fetzer was so unreasonable I lost interest pretty quick.
Thanks for proving my point. You were banned from the truth movement. A group that has respected researchers like Bill Deagle, Kevin Barrett, and Jim Fetzer has no use for a liar and lunatic who lives with his parents because he can't hold down a job mopping floors.
Ian, where did you get the idea that I was banned from the truth movement? I haven't had a job mopping floors since I was 15 years old.
What is this obsession you have with me? It's not my fault that I'm better looking than you, smarter than you, better educated than you, more successful than you, and have more money than you--most people are.
Ian, where did you get the idea that I was banned from the truth movement?
From the truth movement.
I haven't had a job mopping floors since I was 15 years old.
Thanks for proving my point, you have no job and live with your parents.
What is this obsession you have with me? It's not my fault that I'm better looking than you, smarter than you, better educated than you, more successful than you, and have more money than you--most people are.
And Brian tries the "I know you are but what am I" tactic. That won't work, Brian. No matter how much you squeal and squeal and squeal, everyone knows the widows will never have their questions answered and that you have a hideous homeless mullet.
Ian, who in the truth movement told you I was banned? Bill Deagle? Craig Ranke? William Rodriguez?
What makes you think I don't have a job?
How do you know the widows' questions will never be answered? Who died and left you the Magic Ouija Board? History will answer the questions.
I said "I haven't had a job mopping floors since I was 15 years old." I didn't say "I haven't had a job since I was 15 years old."
Learn to read and maybe then you won't be so confused.
You didn't define "it". I warned y'all that your tolerance for Lyin Ian's lies were going to corrode your minds.
Because aside from brain dead truthers, such is not necessary
Ian, who in the truth movement told you I was banned?
Everyone.
What makes you think I don't have a job?
You telling us that you don't have a job. I mean, a person with a job wouldn't spend normal business hours posting dumbspam about invisible widows.
How do you know the widows' questions will never be answered?
Because I'm smart enough to figure it out. You, of course, are too dumb to see it. You're so dumb, you couldn't hold down a job mopping floors!
I said "I haven't had a job mopping floors since I was 15 years old." I didn't say "I haven't had a job since I was 15 years old."
Learn to read and maybe then you won't be so confused.
Squeal squeal squeal!
Poor Brian. He's humiliated because he's unemployed and lives with his parents.
GMS, in your statement "it" needs to be defined else your statement is so ambiguous as to be meaningless.
Thanks for showing that you're a beanie-head Ian. Not everybody who has a job has to sit chained to a cubicle like a veal calf during normal business hours.
And not everybody has to have a job to make money.
Post a Comment
<< Home