Congressman Kook
This will come as no surprise to those who've followed his buffoonish career, but Congressman Jim McDermott (D-Seattle) further beclowns himself on C-Span.
posted by Pat @ 11:16 AM
37 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!
Friday, April 04, 2014
This will come as no surprise to those who've followed his buffoonish career, but Congressman Jim McDermott (D-Seattle) further beclowns himself on C-Span.
Previous Posts
- David L. Griscom Wins A Debate--Against Himself!
- A Preacher to a Dying Breed
- Osama bin Laden Brother in Law "Yeah, we did it"
- A Truther with a Moment of Integrity, Better Late ...
- Substitute Teacher Troofer
- NYCCAN'T Back for Another Bite at the (Big) Apple
- Kore Rowe is Mad We Aren't Paying Attention to Him
- Truther Interrupts Super Bowl Press Conference
- Basile Study Funded
- Among These New Year's Resolutions, The Truther On...
View My Stats
Allies:
37 Comments:
A caller who identifies himself as a Republican baits a Democrat Congress dork. Comedy gold ensues.
Obviously the NWO is behind this in an attempt to undermine this guy to install their own pro-Microsoft, pro-Boeing candidate.
Do we know where Bigfoot was when this call was made?
I guess I missed the funny part. He said there are legitimate questions, and that someday there will be further examination of them.
What's funny about that?
Also, Dr. McDermott is a medical doctor, presumably competent in issues of physics and scientific processes and logic. Also, he's a psychiatrist, which would give him the perspective to understand the difference between delusions and legitimate questions.
"Also, Dr. McDermott is a medical doctor, presumably competent in issues of physics and scientific processes and logic. Also, he's a psychiatrist, which would give him the perspective to understand the difference between delusions and legitimate questions"
A PhD, and an MD are not magic, and I doubt he has bothered to waste his time on a non-issue like WTC7 in the first place. He was simply spouting non-committal political rhetoric to the caller, and he clearly says he was there to talk about healthcare.
McDermott is a psychiatrist. You should look him up, he might be able to help you.
WTC7 was hardly a non-issue. Dan Rather commented that it looked just like a controlled demolition.
The NYT said that the "evaporated" steel was "perhaps the deepest mystery" of 9/11. The FEMA report called for further investigation of that steel, which was never done. FEMA basically threw up its hands and declared that it could not explain it.
Dr. Sunder admitted that NIST "had trouble getting a handle on Building No. 7." NIST has not explained the 2.25 seconds of freefall that they were forced by Mr. Chandler to acknowledge.
Someone needs to sock Brian in the mouth. Like Buzz Aldrin did to Bart Sibrel.
This video is for Brian:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bAMOjyx_sss
Also, Dr. McDermott is a medical doctor, presumably competent in issues of physics and scientific processes and logic. Also, he's a psychiatrist, which would give him the perspective to understand the difference between delusions and legitimate questions.
Yes, like Dr. Bill Deagle. Which is another reason to believe his theory that the WTC was destroyed by micro-nukes planted by modified attack baboons. You, on the other hand, are a failed janitor who lives with his parents. There's no reason to take anything you say seriously.
WTC7 was hardly a non-issue.
False.
Dan Rather commented that it looked just like a controlled demolition.
Nobody cares.
The NYT said that the "evaporated" steel was "perhaps the deepest mystery" of 9/11. The FEMA report called for further investigation of that steel, which was never done. FEMA basically threw up its hands and declared that it could not explain it.
False, false, and false.
Dr. Sunder admitted that NIST "had trouble getting a handle on Building No. 7." NIST has not explained the 2.25 seconds of freefall that they were forced by Mr. Chandler to acknowledge.
False.
Wow, you're not very good at this "logic and evidence" thing, Brian! Maybe that's why real truthers turn to Dr. Deagle when they want theories as to what happened on 9/11.
So Brian, Dr. Deagle has often talked about Deep Underground Military Bases run by the New World Order. I know you were banned from the truth movement for being a liar and lunatic and sex stalker, but let's talk about these military bases. What do you think their purpose is? Are the modified attack baboons trained there?
No surprise, Brian is one of those truthers still confused by the concept of similes.
But it's nice to know Brian believes the MSM when it's convenient.
"WTC7 was hardly a non-issue."
It's only an issue for morons.
"Dan Rather commented that it looked just like a controlled demolition."
I rest my case.
"The NYT said that the "evaporated" steel was "perhaps the deepest mystery" of 9/11."
There was no evaporated steel, so who cares?
"The FEMA report called for further investigation of that steel, which was never done. FEMA basically threw up its hands and declared that it could not explain it."
Probably not the way it happened, knowing your lack of reading ability.
"Dr. Sunder admitted that NIST "had trouble getting a handle on Building No. 7.""
But then he said they got a handle on WTC7. You left that part out.
"NIST has not explained the 2.25 seconds of freefall that they were forced by Mr. Chandler to acknowledge."
Dr. Sunder has explained it a 1000 times. You ignore him because you fail at life.
Yeah, McDermott is a a kook. He is in such a safe liberal district though that he always wins 80% of the vote, even after having to pay a half million dollars in the Newt Gingrich wire tapping scandal.
GMS, I believe the MSM except when I have good reason to believe the reports are not reliable.
What's your point? Do you think the video from C-SPAN was faked? Do you think Dr. McDermott not say what he appears to say on the video?
GMS, I believe the MSM except when I have good reason to believe the reports are not reliable.
Since when have you ever had a good reason for believing any of this crazy shit you believe?
What's your point? Do you think the video from C-SPAN was faked? Do you think Dr. McDermott not say what he appears to say on the video?
Nobody cares about McDermott.
Anyway, I've asked you several questions about the research that prestigious truther Dr. Deagle has done. I'm waiting for your answers. Don't make me resort to making fun of your hideous haircut again.
This comment has been removed by the author.
MGF, NIST has not explained what the NYT called "perhaps the deepest mystery" of 9/11. You don't have to be a moron to want an answer to the mystery.
NIST's alleged collapse mechanism is not practical and was made to appear plausible only by removing vital structural elements such as shear studs and stiffener plates, and by shrinking the surface area of the bearing plate. You don't have to be a moron to want an honest accounting of the structural system.
NIST's report acknowledges that the visible structure fell at freefall for 2.25 seconds, and provides only a handwaving argument about how this is possible. You don't have to be a moron to want an explanation of the freefall phase of the collapse.
NIST's report mischaracterized the locations and times of the fires. You don't need to be a moron to want an honest accounting of them
Demolition expert Danny Jowenko said that WTC7's collapse looked just like a controlled demolition.
The New York Times said there was evaporated steel. Dr. Astaneh Asl even took a picture of the remaining, unevaporated steel. So did the FEMA team that wrote Appendix C. Only a moron discards evidence by pretending it doesn't exist.
The FEMA report called for further investigation of that steel, which was never done. FEMA basically threw up its hands and declared that it could not explain it.
If you had actually read FEMA's report on WTC7, you would not find it necessary to make moronic assumptions about my interpretation of it. They said they could not explain the collapse.
"The specifics of the fires in WTC 7 and how they caused the building to collapse remain unknown at this time. . . . The best hypothesis has only a low probability of occurrence. Further research, investigation, and analyses are needed."
"MGF, NIST has not explained what the NYT called "perhaps the deepest mystery" of 9/11. "
Here's what the NY Times said, you dolt:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/22/nyregion/22wtccnd.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
“Our take-home message today is the reason for the collapse of World Trade Center 7 is no longer a mystery,” Dr. Sunder said at a news conference at the institute’s headquarters. “It did not collapse from explosives or fuel oil fires.”
What? Dr. Sunder figured it out? That makes Brian a liar.
"Without lateral support for nine stories, Column 79 buckled, and the floors above gave way all the way up to the roof. Only then did the collapse become visible from the exterior with a penthouse area on the roof first falling in, followed by what looked like the sudden implosion of the tower, Dr. Sunder said. “The physics is consistent, it is sound, it has been analyzed,” he said."
The pfyzzicks is consistant? Seems like Sunder is pretty sure, him being an actual expert on the subject.
"Dr. Sunder said the investigators considered the possibility that explosives were used, but ruled it out because the noise associated with such an explosion would have been 10 times louder than being in front of the speakers at a rock concert, he said, and detectable from as far as a half a mile away. He said that interviews with eyewitnesses and a review of video taken that day provided no evidence of a sound that loud just before the collapse."
Man, this Sunder guy is just shooting your theory to pieces.
Does being a moron cause a lot of pain? I bet it does.
"Told of the doubts, Dr. Sunder said he could not explain why the skepticism would not die.
“I am really not a psychologist,” he said. “Our job was to come up with the best science.”"
Ouch.
Did you even read the article? My guess is you tried, but your crayons kept rolling off your TV tray.
Don't worry, MGF, Brian will call Dr. Sunder a liar soon enough. You see, when Dr. Sunder says things that Brian wants to hear, he's an expert. When he says things that contradict Brian's delusions, he's a liar.
Note that Brian won't reply to me because he's humiliated that I pwn3d him with Dr. Deagle.
Here's where the NYT called the steel "the deepest mystery":
"Perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation involves extremely thin bits of steel collected from the trade towers and from 7 World Trade Center, a 47-story high rise that also collapsed for unknown reasons. The steel apparently melted away, but no fire in any of the buildings was believed to be hot enough to melt steel outright."
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/22/nyregion/22wtccnd.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&
That mystery was never solved. Dr. Sunder did NOT figure it out, and did not claim that he did.
Dr. Sunder's claim that "the physics is consistent" is a very bold claim made in the context of the draft report issued in August. In the final report NIST was forced to admit that the visible structure fell in free fall for 2.25 seconds, and the draft language claiming that NIST's analysis was "consistent with physical principles" was removed in every instance.
What makes you think I have a theory? NIST's investigation of explosives was dishonest because it assumed the use of an archaic (and very noisy) WWII explosive, RDX, instead of a more modern and less noisy explosive. It also ignored the many noise-reducing techniques that could have been employed, ignored the possibility that silent incendiaries might have brought WTC7 down.
At least three witnesses testified to explosive noise associated with the collapse. NIST dishonestly pretends that these witnesses do not exiat.
Yes, I read the article years ago. Do you have a point other than "NIST says so, I believe it, and that's the end of it"? That's not very scientific of you.
Ian, you're changing the subject from what NIST said to whether Dr. Sunder is a liar or not. I reported what NIST said: the towers fell at freefall. That's what they said.
I didn't say Dr. Sunder was an expert. I reported what he said. Maybe if you had an education beyond your vocational training you would understand these things.
You only humiliate yourself.
I reported what NIST said: the towers fell at freefall. That's what they said.
False.
I didn't say Dr. Sunder was an expert. I reported what he said. Maybe if you had an education beyond your vocational training you would understand these things.
False.
You only humiliate yourself.
Squeal squeal squeal!
What makes you think I have a theory? NIST's investigation of explosives was dishonest because it assumed the use of an archaic (and very noisy) WWII explosive, RDX, instead of a more modern and less noisy explosive. It also ignored the many noise-reducing techniques that could have been employed, ignored the possibility that silent incendiaries might have brought WTC7 down.
Your theory is right there in the paragraph: magic spray-on thermite and invisible silent explosives.
Thanks for proving MGF's point.
Let's go back to Brian's earlier comment:
Also, Dr. McDermott is a medical doctor, presumably competent in issues of physics and scientific processes and logic.
Dr. Deagle is a medical doctor, and is presumably competent in physics, scientific processes, and logic. This is why his views carry weight in the truth movement. You would know this if you hadn't been banned from the truth movement.
So let's discuss Dr. Deagle's ideas further. The essential mysteries suggest that micro-nukes planted by modified attack baboons brought the towers down. If you have evidence against this proposition, please provide it.
Ian, you lie. I reported what NIST said: the towers fell at freefall. That's what they said. I didn't say Dr. Sunder was an expert. I reported what he said.
Ian, you lie. There was no paragraph about magic spray-on thermite and invisible silent explosives.
There is no logical connection between Dr. Deagle's status as a medical doctor and the fact that his views carry NO weight in the truth movement. There is no evidence of the use of baboons, and I'm not aware of any evidence of the use of micro nukes.
I have not been banned from the truth movement. You are a liar.
Ian, you lie. I reported what NIST said: the towers fell at freefall. That's what they said.
False. Learn to read, Brian.
I didn't say Dr. Sunder was an expert. I reported what he said.
False. Learn to read, Brian.
Ian, you lie. There was no paragraph about magic spray-on thermite and invisible silent explosives.
False. I reported what you said.
There is no logical connection between Dr. Deagle's status as a medical doctor and the fact that his views carry NO weight in the truth movement.
False. Dr. Deagle is a preeminent truther. You are a failed janitor who was banned from the truth movement.
There is no evidence of the use of baboons, and I'm not aware of any evidence of the use of micro nukes.
You're obviously not aware of the essential mysteries of 9/11 then.
I have not been banned from the truth movement. You are a liar.
False and false.
Ian, you seem to think it's clever to lie about the death of 3000 Americans and the inability of their family members to get answers to their questions.
Any idiot can do that, and you're living proof that any idiot does,
What is wrong with you?
"What makes you think I have a theory?"
You spout them all of the time. It is part of your mental illness.
"NIST's investigation of explosives was dishonest because it assumed the use of an archaic (and very noisy) WWII explosive, RDX, instead of a more modern and less noisy explosive."
Less noisy explosives...and here I am thinking you'd never top "Meatball on a Fork"...
"It also ignored the many noise-reducing techniques that could have been employed..."
Not the most important silent cause: Gravity
".. ignored the possibility that silent incendiaries might have brought WTC7 down."
The NIST is handicapped by being forced to deal with reality, and cannot explore themes like magic, voodoo, and nanothermite.
Ian, you seem to think it's clever to lie about the death of 3000 Americans and the inability of their family members to get answers to their questions.
I don't lie. Also, family members have gotten their questions answered. Nobody cares about the questions of a mentally ill unemployed janitor with a hideous haircut.
Any idiot can do that, and you're living proof that any idiot does,
What is wrong with you?
My, such squealing!
Poor Brian. He's humiliated because people listen to the esteemed Dr. Bill Deagle and nobody listens to Brian.
Less noisy explosives...and here I am thinking you'd never top "Meatball on a Fork"...
Brian's been babbling about invisible silent explosives for a while, along with magic spray-on thermite ("incendiaries") for a while.
He's made it clear to us that he believes that Dick Cheney ordered invisible elevator repairmen to spray magic thermite and plant invisible silent explosives in WTC 7, because without the collapse of a building that nobody cares about with no deaths, he wouldn't have mandate to steal all the oil in Afghanistan for the benefit of Halliburton.
You have to admit, it makes perfect sense if you've been living on your parents' couch and sniffing glue for the last 4 decades.
MGF, what "theories" do you think I have "spouted"?
I don't think you know what a theory is.
As I understand it, explosives have a widely variant degree of brisance--less brisance, less noise. Correct me if I'm wrong, with authoritative cites.
Gravity can not cause collapses unless the structure is compromised. Citing gravity as a cause of collapse is like citing death as a cause of death.
There's nothin magic about nanothermite--there are articles about it in the scientific literature--as you would find if you would bother to google it.
MGF, what "theories" do you think I have "spouted"?
See my post above.
I don't think you know what a theory is.
Nobody cares what a mentally ill unemployed janitor thinks.
As I understand it, explosives have a widely variant degree of brisance--less brisance, less noise. Correct me if I'm wrong, with authoritative cites.
Translation: the towers were destroyed by invisible silent explosives.
Gravity can not cause collapses unless the structure is compromised.
The structure was compromised by debris from WTC 1 and uncontrolled fires that lasted hours.
There's nothin magic about nanothermite--there are articles about it in the scientific literature--as you would find if you would bother to google it.
Translation: the towers were destroyed by magic spray-on thermite.
Anyway, now that Brian has finished humiliating himself with his ridiculous belief in magic invisible explosives and incendiaries, let's talk about serious theories.
As Brian said above, Bill Deagle is competent in issues of physics, scientific processes, and logic, and thus we should take his theories seriously.
First, Brian, you should learn about the essential mysteries of 9/11. Once you do, you'll understand that the towers were obviously destroyed by micro-nukes planted by modified attack baboons.
Also, we need to talk about chemtrails, Brian. Dr. Deagle is well known for his explanation of chemtrails, and how they're used to turn the air into a plasma and so they can have geo-tectonic effects using scalar satellite-based technologies to trigger what's called the 'peizo-electic slip threshold' with specific harmonic frequencies of any earthquake. They also set up the trans-dimensional vortex that's used to create super-storms.
If Brian hadn't been banned from the truth movement for being a worthless liar and a sex stalker, he'd be familiar with Dr. Deagle's cutting-edge research.
More lyin Iananity from Lyin Ian, I see.
Brian, if we're not going to talk about 9/11 here and Dr. Deagle's theories on it, then I guess I'll just have to make fun of your hideous haircut again. This blog is supposed to be about 9/11, and you don't want to talk about it.
It thinks it's funny.
Thanks for proving my point. You don't want to talk about 9/11 because I've pwn3d you every time you have. You'll just post spam instead.
http://911scholars.ning.com/profile/BrianGood
Brian really has it all going above. The hideous homeless mullet, the 1000 yard stare, the clothes stolen from the Goodwill dumpster. And of course, he was banned from yet another truther group.
Post a Comment
<< Home