Monday, June 02, 2014

Moron the No-757 Hit the Pentagon Nonsense

It just never ends:

From the beginning, the official 9/11 Pentagon story caused cognitive dissonance, since the visual evidence suggests that nothing as big as a 757 could have hit the outside wall of the Pentagon and disappeared even more completely than the planes that hit the World Trade Center, where they burned until the WTC collapsed around them. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

The alternative stories posit a missile or specially rigged small plane hitting the Pentagon. There is no known physical evidence to support such stories. According to Snopes.com (as of April 2008), these stories are false. Much of the evidence collected by government investigators remains secret. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Even a determined debunker of 9/11 skeptics, while laying out a coherent argument that the official 9/11 Pentagon story is true (and conflating physical evidence with photography), ends up concluding:

"In this essay I asked what conclusions about the Pentagon attack were supported by physical evidence – primarily post-crash photographs of the site. I found that, in every aspect I considered, this evidence comports with the crash of a Boeing 757. At the same time, the evidence does not conclusively prove that the aircraft was a 757, much less that it was Flight 77. However, that lack of conclusiveness should not be surprising given the systematic suppression of evidence by authorities."

As you can probably guess, that "determined debunker of 9/11 skeptics" is anything but.  It's Jim Hoffman, whom we last heard from proposing that the controlled demolition of the World Trade Center was accomplished with explosive ceiling tiles.

As usual, the comments are even more ridiculous; it's like being in a time warp back to 2006:

The videos of those three buildings coming down make it 'obviously obvious,' even to a brain damaged individual, such as myself that it was a controlled demolition; carefully planned and executed by high level individuals. Their only mistake, as far as I can see, was to make the fall so clean and perfect; or maybe they wanted to intimidate and terrorize and cow us into submission and passive acquiescence by shoving the facts in our faces.
On the other hand, maybe they were more interested in avoiding "collateral damage" as they didn't want to damage their buddies' buildings.
Yeah, it's amazing
how little


collateral damage

there was.

Note as well the comments that are voted up and down; not too hard to guess that William Boardman's theories on the Pentagon are popular with the readers there, despite the fact that the supposedly responsible Troofers have all disavowed the no-757 at the Pentagon theories.

64 Comments:

At 02 June, 2014 15:27, Blogger snug.bug said...

Pat, what theories did Mr. Boardman profess that are so "popular with the readers"? I seem to have missed that part.

 
At 02 June, 2014 17:24, Blogger snug.bug said...

Also, it would appear that Mr. Boardman is something of a neophyte to the 9/11 truth issue.

I never heard of him, and I never heard of RSN either. After 73 articles posted at RSN, it appears that this is Mr. Boardman's first article about 9/11.

I think you'd admit that wading through the bs when you're new to the issues is quite a challenge. After all, 9/11 newbies who relied on comments at SLC for information would probably believe that there are no 9/11 widows--because how would anyone dare say such a thing if it weren't true? And besides, nobody corrects him. They'd also believe that Willie Rodriguez saved hundreds of lives with his "Key of Hope".

 
At 02 June, 2014 18:10, Blogger Ian said...

It's cute when Brian acts like he's some arbiter of what is accepted and rejected by the truth movement when he himself was banned from the truth movement

 
At 02 June, 2014 18:11, Blogger Ian said...

I never said there are no widows. I said the widows are invisible. You live in a fantasy world.

 
At 02 June, 2014 22:42, Blogger Pat said...

Look at the comments that are voted up or down, Brian. Boardman's first comment is voted up 72 times. Truther comments are all voted up, debunker comments all voted down.

 
At 03 June, 2014 00:15, Blogger snug.bug said...

Pat, you didn't answer the question. What theories of Mr. Boardman are popular? I didn't see him profess any theories. He just said they existed. As a former judge, he probably has a lot of experience seeing bullshit theories.

 
At 03 June, 2014 00:34, Blogger snug.bug said...

31 May, 2011 16:50, Blogger Ian said...

"There are no widows who have questions."

http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2011/05/jones-overunityh.html

 
At 03 June, 2014 00:48, Blogger snug.bug said...

03 March, 2013 17:40, Blogger Ian said...

"There are no widows."

http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2013/02/gage-2011-85000.html

 
At 03 June, 2014 00:54, Blogger snug.bug said...

28 April, 2014 05:01, Blogger Ian said...

"There are indeed no widows."

http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2014/04/gop-senate-candidate-flirts-with-troof.html

 
At 03 June, 2014 00:55, Blogger snug.bug said...

Ian, on 13 January, 2011 09:54, You said I babble "about phony 'widows' all day."

08 February, 2011 11:10,you wrote "you're constantly here babbling about magic thermite elves and imaginary widows."

06 February, 2011 08:52, after I had said "You have repeatedly claimed that there are no widows, and that the widows have no questions outstanding," you wrote in response: "This is true. Brian, you're aware that things that are true are not 'lies', right?"

Ape, you lie damnably. You lie like a Calormene. You lie like an Ape.

 
At 03 June, 2014 06:33, Blogger Ian said...

Poor Brian. He's hysterical because nobody cares about his widows.

Also, everyone knows that apes tell the truth. You fail again, Brian.

 
At 03 June, 2014 06:38, Blogger Ian said...

So Brian, have you accepted the reality that the widows will never have their questions answered, that there will never be a new investigation, and that Rodriguez will always be recognized as a hero, or will you continue squealing about how "history" is on your side?

 
At 03 June, 2014 08:20, Blogger snug.bug said...

Ian, history will inevitably answer the widows' questions, because Appendix 4 will stand as one of the vital historical documents of its age.

Your mewlings, however, will be of interest only to the cultural historians who want to study the narcissistic, arrogant, and willfully unintelligent belief systems of those who unwittingly aided from within the destruction of the short-lived American Empire.

 
At 03 June, 2014 08:25, Blogger snug.bug said...

Wizzie LiedRugAs is already recognized as a con artist all over the world. Few places in the world are hick enough to miss the fact that he's a con artist.

Did those fabulous pictures of Willie find a home on any mainstream or 9/11 Truth website in the world?

I didn't think so. The silence more eloquently proves my point than anything I could say.

 
At 03 June, 2014 09:59, Blogger Ian said...

So Brian will continue squealing rather than accept reality.

OK, Brian. I'll make a bet with you on the widows questions. If they aren't answered by June 1st, 2015, you have to go on the Kevin Barrett show and admit to the world that you're unemployed, live with your parents, and were banned from the truth movement for stalking Carol Brouillet. Deal?

 
At 03 June, 2014 11:02, Blogger snug.bug said...

Lyin Ian, your clownspam Iananity is distracting from Pat's failure to identify the "theories" he believes that Mr. Boardman holds.

 
At 03 June, 2014 11:34, Blogger Ian said...

Brian, you didn't answer as to whether you accept my challenge. Are you going to run away squealing and crying AGAIN?

 
At 03 June, 2014 17:39, Blogger Ian said...

Still no acceptance of my challenge from Brian. Well, I guess he really doesn't think that the widows will ever have their questions answered, or that there will ever be a new investigation into 9/11, or that anyone will ever agree that Rodriguez is a fraud. Brian just posts that spam in a pathetic attempt to give his worthless life meaning.

Seek professional help, Brian.

 
At 03 June, 2014 18:33, Blogger snug.bug said...

Ian, can you tell us what "theories" Mr. Boardman professed? Pat seems unable to.

Can you explain why Willie's fabulous pictures haven't been picked up anywhere else on the internet, not even on PressTV?




 
At 03 June, 2014 18:38, Blogger Ian said...

Ian, can you tell us what "theories" Mr. Boardman professed? Pat seems unable to.

Can you explain why Willie's fabulous pictures haven't been picked up anywhere else on the internet, not even on PressTV?


We're not talking about this. We're talking about your cowardly refusal to accept my challenge. It's clear that you don't believe that the widows will ever have their questions answered, nor do you believe that there will be a new investigation.

 
At 03 June, 2014 19:01, Blogger snug.bug said...

We're talking about the inability of anyone on this board to explain what "theories" Mr. Boardman put forth.

There's no need to talk about your goofy belief that the widows not having their questions answered is a reason their questions need not be answered.

 
At 03 June, 2014 19:25, Blogger Ian said...

Thanks for admitting that the widows will never have their questions answered, Brian.

 
At 03 June, 2014 21:17, Blogger snug.bug said...

I didn't admit anything of the sort.

Now can you tell us what theories Mr. Boardman put forth?

 
At 04 June, 2014 04:51, Blogger Ian said...

I didn't admit anything of the sort.

Well, you haven't accepted my challenge yet, which means you don't think the widows will ever have their questions answered.

Now can you tell us what theories Mr. Boardman put forth?

Poor Brian. He's desperate to change the subject since I've completely pwn3d him by issuing a challenge that he, of course, ran away from squealing and crying.

 
At 04 June, 2014 10:48, Blogger snug.bug said...

I didn't run away from anything, Lyin Ian.

Nobody can back up Pat's claim that Mr. Boardman has theories?

 
At 04 June, 2014 12:44, Blogger Ian said...

Brian, you refused my challenge. Therefore, you are in effect admitting that the widows will never have their questions answered, which is what I've been saying all along.

All the spam about Boardman won't change these facts.

 
At 04 June, 2014 14:01, Blogger snug.bug said...

It's not spam to ask Pat to back up his claim.

Where's your buddy Willie, BTW? How come his "fabulous" pictures haven't been picked up by any of his fans anywhere on the internet?

What do you think he's saying to Bill Clinton that makes Clinton want to puke? If he telling Bill about the "exploshun!" that lifted him off his feet from below before the airplane hit? Is he telling Bill how he single-handedly rescued fifteen (15) persons who can't be bothered to thank him?

Is he telling Bill about his recent trip to Iran?

And how's Elvis?


 
At 04 June, 2014 15:29, Blogger Ian said...

Brian, all this spam won't change the fact that you've admitted that the widows will never have their questions answered.

Also, there will never be a new investigation, and you will never convince anyone that Rodriguez is a fraud.

Sorry.

 
At 04 June, 2014 16:03, Blogger snug.bug said...

I would never admit such an Ianane thing, Lyin Ian.

The world knows Rodriguez is a fraud. That's why his fabulous pictures find no hosting. SLC is the only place that doesn't know.

 
At 04 June, 2014 16:07, Blogger Ian said...

Brian, you did not accept my challenge. That's the same as admitting the widows will never have their questions answered.

Also, nobody cares about your homosexual obsession with Rodriguez and your desperate search for more "fabulous" pictures of him.

 
At 04 June, 2014 17:08, Blogger snug.bug said...

I was not aware of any challenge.

 
At 04 June, 2014 18:02, Blogger Ian said...

I was not aware of any challenge.

It's right above, Brian. I'm so confident that the widows will never have their questions answered that I'll make a bet with you: If they aren't answered by June 1st, 2015, you have to go on the Kevin Barrett show and admit to the world that you're unemployed, live with your parents, and were banned from the truth movement for stalking Carol Brouillet. Deal?

 
At 04 June, 2014 18:58, Blogger snug.bug said...

I don't read your posts, Ian. I can pretty much safely say "More Lyin Iananity from Lyin Ian" and leave it at that.

 
At 05 June, 2014 04:53, Blogger Ian said...

I don't read your posts, Ian. I can pretty much safely say "More Lyin Iananity from Lyin Ian" and leave it at that.

Yup, this is the kind of hysterical squealing I expect from a mentally ill unemployed janitor who I just humiliated yet again.

Just so everyone is clear, Brian does not believe the widows will ever have their questions answered, which is why he refused my challenged. Like he did when challenged by Willie Rodriguez or Craig Ranke or Kevin Barrett, Brian ran away squealing and crying like the coward and liar that he is.

 
At 05 June, 2014 06:28, Blogger John said...

"All the spam about Boardman won't change these facts."
- Ian, 04 June, 2014 12:44

"It's not spam to ask Pat to back up his claim."
- snugbug, 04 June, 2014 14:01

"Brian, all this spam won't change the fact that you've admitted that the widows will never have their questions answered."
-Ian, 04 June, 2014 15:29

"I would never admit such an Ianane thing, Lyin Ian."
-snugbug, 04 June, 2014 16:03

"I don't read your posts, Ian."
-snugbug, 04 June, 2014 18:58


 
At 05 June, 2014 07:05, Blogger snug.bug said...

So let's see--after 35 posts I STILL can't get anyone to tell me what are the theories owned by Mr. Boardman. Does anyone remember there was an article by a guy named Mr. Boardman?

 
At 05 June, 2014 08:40, Blogger Ian said...

Nobody cares about Boardman.

And nice job catching Brian in an obvious desperate lie, John. Brian is trying to escape from my humiliation of him as I demonstrated that he doesn't think the widows will ever have their questions answered.

 
At 05 June, 2014 08:58, Blogger snug.bug said...

Pat cared enough about Mr. Boardman to write a post about him.

 
At 05 June, 2014 10:48, Blogger Ian said...

Yes, but Pat's not here. I'm here and I don't care about Boardman. I care about humiliating you over your obsession with invisible widows.

 
At 05 June, 2014 11:20, Blogger snug.bug said...

But see, you're lying. Now you say you don't care about Boardman, but earlier you said "Nobody cares about Boardman." You can't have it both ways.

 
At 05 June, 2014 12:37, Blogger John said...

"I don't read your posts, Ian."
-snugbug, 04 June, 2014 18:58

 
At 05 June, 2014 14:36, Blogger Ian said...

Nobody cares about Boardman. That includes me.

Jesus, Brian, this is pathetic even by your standards. It doesn't change the fact that you have admitted that the widows will never have their questions answered.

 
At 05 June, 2014 15:34, Blogger snug.bug said...

I would never would admit such a stupid thing. History inevitably will answer the widows' questions.

Yes, "nobody" includes you. Nobody is you. So when you say "nobody" cars, you're saying you care.

 
At 05 June, 2014 16:41, Blogger Ian said...

I would never would admit such a stupid thing. History inevitably will answer the widows' questions.

Brian, you refused my challenge. That means you know the widows will never have their questions answered, no matter how much squealspam you post about "history".

Yes, "nobody" includes you. Nobody is you. So when you say "nobody" cars, you're saying you care.

Poor Brian. He's just posting incoherent squealspam because I've completely pwn3d him.

Nobody cares about Boardman. Nobody cares about your widows. Nobody cares about what Richard Gage thinks.

9/11 truth is dead. Sorry.

 
At 05 June, 2014 17:34, Blogger Ian said...

Anyway, Brian, I would like to commend you for finally removing that ridiculous fantasy jerk-off photo of Willie Rodriguez from your avatar.

Maybe there's hope for you yet. Maybe if you actually get that hideous homeless mullet of yours cut, you could be on the road to respectability.

 
At 05 June, 2014 18:19, Blogger snug.bug said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 05 June, 2014 18:50, Blogger snug.bug said...

Also, your belief that a pic of Willie morphed into Zippie-the-Pinhead mode somehow qualified as a "fantasy jerk-off photo" shows that you are not qualified to criticize a McChicken, let alone my haircut.

 
At 05 June, 2014 18:57, Blogger snug.bug said...

Bleh (that's the new "meh").

I removed my picture of Willie because the fact that his faked pictures on SLC got no traction ANYWHERE showed he was truly nothing but a washed-up con artist who can't even be trusted with the keys you'd give a janitor, and I actually felt sorry for him.

Of course if he surfaces again in a 9/11 Truth context--in a movie, for instance--or if he tries to make an appearance in the SF Bay Area, I will bring all my Big Guns to bear and make sure he gets nothing but regrets from it. But there's little danger of that.

I confronted his (allegedly) ex-MI5 sponsor, Annie Machon several years ago. I said "You can not possibly be dumb enough to believe Willie Rodriguez's story, and yet you pretended that you did. I'm very disappointed in you." She could not respond meaningfully to that.

I have nothing but contempt for Ian's version of respectability.

I can only be glad that Willie has inflicted his credibility-killing affiliation on SLC just as he did to so many gullible truthers.

 
At 05 June, 2014 20:12, Blogger Ian said...

Nobody cares about your homosexual obsession with Rodriguez.

 
At 05 June, 2014 23:28, Blogger snug.bug said...

You seem to have a homosexual obsession with me , Ian, always offering me fashion tips.

I have good reason to be antagonistic to a con artist who discredited his supporters in the truth movement and stole his glory from the dead heroes of 9/11.

You have no reason to be antagonistic to me.

 
At 06 June, 2014 04:48, Blogger Ian said...

So, this thread ends where every other one does: with Brian Good babbling about that "strutting, bragging, lying, hot sexy hunk of Latin manhood", Willie Rodriguez.

Well, at least Brian admits that the widows will never have their questions answered.

 
At 06 June, 2014 04:54, Blogger Ian said...

Also, I'm not antagonistic toward you, Brian. I'm trying to help you by instructing you on how normal people act and think. If you start following my tips (no longer babbling about 9/11 conspiracy nonsense, getting a decent haircut, no longer posting homosexual stalkerspam about Rodriguez all over the internet, etc.), people might actually think that you're a normal person who isn't suffering from severe mental illness.

I'm trying to be your friend, Brian, and you keep rejecting me.

 
At 06 June, 2014 07:21, Blogger snug.bug said...

William Rodriguez is not a "strutting, bragging, lying, hot sexy hunk of Latin manhood". He's a sagging, jiggling, waddling blob of Latin manboob.

When did it become "stalking" to comment on news articles?

Don't tell me about normal people, Ian. Normal people don't lie about the victims of 9/11 like you and Willie do.

But let's get back on topic. Can anyone identify any theories that Mr. Boardman professed in his article? I didn't think so.

 
At 06 June, 2014 09:24, Blogger Ian said...

See, Brian, insane people don't realize that they're doing crazy things. Wesley Willis didn't know it was insane to write songs where he told the voices in his head to "suck a male camel's dick with hoisen sauce". And you don't realize it's insane to post spam about 9/11 all over the internet.

Take it from a smart, successful, socially adept person like me: you really need to work on not appearing like a paranoid lunatic sex predator.

 
At 06 June, 2014 09:25, Blogger Ian said...

Also, nobody cares about Boardman. 9/11 truth is dead.

 
At 06 June, 2014 12:41, Blogger snug.bug said...

Ian, Pat cares about Boardman. You care enough to lie.

You show no evidence that you are smart and successful. Such people have no need to brag about themselves under anonymous internet id's.

Success is nothing to brag about. Any idiot can succeed.

 
At 06 June, 2014 13:23, Blogger Ian said...

Poor Brian. He's hysterical because I'm smart and successful with good friends, a prestigious job, and a loving fiancée, while Brian is a failed janitor who lives with his parents, has no friends, and hasn't gotten laid since the Nixon years.

 
At 06 June, 2014 13:24, Blogger Ian said...

Also, nobody cares about Boardman. Or your invisible widows.

 
At 06 June, 2014 13:33, Blogger snug.bug said...

More Lyin Iananity from Lyin Ian.

 
At 07 June, 2014 00:55, Blogger The Scrutinist said...

I'm so proud of you two.

 
At 07 June, 2014 08:35, Blogger snug.bug said...

Well, you know what the man says: "If you don't like the news, go out and grow some of your own."

 
At 07 June, 2014 09:35, Blogger snug.bug said...

If you want to improve the quality of discourse on this board,m then try addressing the outstanding questions (What theories did Mr. Boardman put forth?) and tell Ian to quit lying.

 
At 07 June, 2014 14:39, OpenID mgferris said...

Boardman on the Pentagon:

http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/23969-focus-911-museum-world-trade-center-evidence-no-plane-hit-pentagon

It took me 2 minutes on google because I'm not a retard.

This no plane crap underlines the fundamental flaw in 9-11 Trooferism, that no idea is too stupid to be pursued. This is why they fail.

 
At 07 June, 2014 15:00, Blogger snug.bug said...

It took you two minutes to google the article that Pat linked in the topic post.

The question under discussion is--what theories did Mr. Boardman advocate?

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home