Anatomy of a Truther Moron
The film Anatomy of a Great Deception is being pushed lately by Truthers; the fact that Box Boy's clown posse gets 5% of the sales is probably a big reason why.
The film is much more personal than Loose Change or 9-11 Mysteries; it might well be subtitled, "How I Became a Truther" because that is the theme. Of course, in essence it's the same old CT crap in a new wrapper.
The auteur, David Hooper, starts with a simple question. Why did Bush stay in Booker Elementary so long after the first two plane crashes? He concludes (like most idiot Truthers) that he or his Secret Service detail must have known it was safe. He emphasizes that it was known that two other planes had been hijacked and yet Bush stayed there.
This is, of course, wrong. Bush left Booker at about 9:34 or 9:35, before it was known that AA Flight 77 or UA Flight 93 had been hijacked. As I have pointed out several times, it would have been reasonably difficult to target Booker Elementary from the air. Sarasota is not a small town, and there were 42 different elementary schools in the city back then. Hitting the Pentagon or the Twin Towers was pretty easy; all three are enormous buildings, easily visible from quite a distance away and very distinctive.
It doesn't get any better. After that he goes on to talk about WTC-7. He expresses astonishment that Shyam Sunder discounted the use of explosives bringing down the building. Why would Sunder even bring that up? Very suspicious. Of course, Hooper is taking advantage of the argument that he was discovering this circa 2011-2012, and therefore he didn't know that the Truthers had been claiming WTC-7 was a controlled demolition well before Sunder's analysis of the building collapse was complete.
He also is amazed to learn that some 9-11 families are requesting a new investigation of WTC-7. Why? Good question, David! Nobody died in that building. And of course, the family members shown are all the goofball Truther family members like Lorie Van Auken, Mindy Kleinberg and Bob McIlvaine.
He flashes some books and films at us; I particularly love seeing 9-11 the Ultimate Truth by one of my favorite nutbars, Laura Knight Jadczyk.
This was Laura Knight-Jadczyk and her channelled material came from a mysterious source: "We transmit "through" the opening that is presented in the locator that you represent as Cassiopaea, due to the strong radio pulses aligned from Cassiopaea, which are due to a pulsar from a neutron star 300 light years behind it, as seen from your locator. This facilitates a clear channel transmission from 6th density to 3rd density."He also shows 9-11 Evil, where Victor Thorn blows the yarmulke off Israeli involvement in 9-11; no link on that bit of slime, but you can find it easily.
These beings apparently communicated with Ms Knight-Jadczyk through the means of a Ouiji board and with the help of another individual, Fred Irland, whose name, curiously enough, can be found nowhere in the published Cassiopaean material. At first, the communications were the ordinary sort of thing expected from ouiji aliens. But as they got better at it, the answers began to take on a life of their own.
There's also 9-11 Finding the Truth, which is written by a Judy Wood devotee named Andrew Johnson. I mean, seriously.
He makes the usual ridiculous claims, like that WTC-7 fell almost as fast as a bowling ball, and into its own footprint. Well, if its footprint included the Verizon Building and Fiterman Hall. He says that the destruction of the building crippled the investigations of Enron and Worldcom; that would be news to Kenneth Lay, Jeff Skilling and Bernie Ebbers.
I would dread to continue with this ridiculous movie; fortunately it was only up for a day or two at YouTube before Mr Hooper had it taken down with a copyright claim. Apparently he only wants to wake up the sheeple at $14.95 per shearing.
posted by Pat @ 12:15 AM
78 comments
78 Comments:
Yup, truther genius at work again. The US government managed to pull this incredibly complex conspiracy off without a hitch and without anyone ever blowing the whistle....but they still couldn't pay off the jury to acquit Skilling and Lay, nor could they plant a few old sarin gas cannisters in the Iraqi desert.
Makes perfect sense to me.
So Ian, you think 19 guys mostly in their early twenties can pull off what the best bunch of private mercenaries on earth can't handle?
Without a hitch? Here are some hitches:
*WTC7
*Squibs and pulverized concrete *NIST's unwillingness to analyze the collapses
*NORAD sitting its hands
*The 9/11 Commission's refusal to answer 273 of the widows' 300 questions
*The DoD's inability to defend itself from a predictable attack on the Pentagon
*US Intel ignoring warnings from 13 foreign countries, four FBI offices, and the CIA
*Condi Rice's perjury in testimony to the 9/11 Commission
Lots of hitches. It was only a massive campaign of media intimidation that keeps those hitches from becoming widespread public knowledge.
Any sarin canisters planted in the desert would have been subject to intense scrutiny by the UN, which would then have found that the stuff was manufactured in the USA--just as the anthrax was found to be from Fort Detrick. Bad for business.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Pat, I resisted calls for my premature endorsement of the movie because I was afraid that jew-hatred would be featured. I've only watched half of it so far, and saw a few errors. It seems that this film did not have the advantage of AE911truth's top list of fact-checkers.
But as to the Booker school, you are all wet. The Booker school was highly unique among local area schools in that it was just 2 miles away from the Sarasota airport--and directly in line with the runways. Contrary to your claims, it was easily identifiable from the air by its proximity to landmarks such as railroad tracks, a golf course, and an eccentric "bullseye" pattern in the housing development nearby.
It would appear that you rely on lying internet propagandists for your "facts". You should reject those clowns and do your own research.
So Ian, you think 19 guys mostly in their early twenties can pull off what the best bunch of private mercenaries on earth can't handle?
What makes you think private mercenaries wouldn't have been able to handle it? Did Kevin Barett tell you that?
Without a hitch? Here are some hitches:
Yes, Brian. I'm aware of your paranoid delusions. They're not hitches. They're just more evidence that you need psychiatric care, as if your hideous haircut wasn't enough evidence of that.
Any sarin canisters planted in the desert would have been subject to intense scrutiny by the UN, which would then have found that the stuff was manufactured in the USA--just as the anthrax was found to be from Fort Detrick. Bad for business.
Well, except that they could have used modified attack baboons to steal sarin from the Russians, and then have them plant the cannisters in the desert.
You're not too bright, are you?
It seems that this film did not have the advantage of AE911truth's top list of fact-checkers.
"Fact-checkers". HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!
But as to the Booker school, you are all wet. The Booker school was highly unique among local area schools in that it was just 2 miles away from the Sarasota airport--and directly in line with the runways. Contrary to your claims, it was easily identifiable from the air by its proximity to landmarks such as railroad tracks, a golf course, and an eccentric "bullseye" pattern in the housing development nearby.
Yes, railroad tracks, a golf course, "eccentric" patterns to housing developments. These are all unique landmarks. They might as well be Half Dome or Mt. Rainier.
It would appear that you rely on lying internet propagandists for your "facts". You should reject those clowns and do your own research.
I always do my own research. That's how I know that you're unemployed and live with your parents, and that you were banned from Wikipedia, and that you ran away squealing and crying from a debate with Craig Ranke.
Hey Brian, do you think the "widows" will have their questions answered on Monday, now that people are back from the Jewish holiday?
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!!!!!
Poor Ian, spending another Saturday afternoon in NYC blathering on the internet instead of showing his bride a good time.
I pity you.
Poor Ian, spending another Saturday afternoon in NYC blathering on the internet instead of showing his bride a good time.
I pity you.
Poor Brian. He's hysterical because I'm happily married, and his romantic life consists of posting spam about Willie Rodriguez on the internet.
And notice how Brian doesn't want to talk about 9/11 anymore, because every time he does, I completely humiliate him. HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!
Ian, Half Dome or Mount Rainier would be very good landmarks if they were relevant, which they are not.
The unique bullseye configuration to the streets in the housing development near the Booker School was quite unique.
Of course, how could you miss the Booker School if you were flying in to the Sarasota airport. There it is, directly in line with the runway, and just 2 miles away.
Ian, Half Dome or Mount Rainier would be very good landmarks if they were relevant, which they are not.
What makes you think that they are irrelevant? Did Kevin Barrett tell you that?
The unique bullseye configuration to the streets in the housing development near the Booker School was quite unique.
You can tell Brian is hysterical because he said "unique" twice. Next he'll capitalize it, the way he does "FACT" whenever we taunt him over Willie Rodriguez being a hero who rejected his sexual advances.
Of course, how could you miss the Booker School if you were flying in to the Sarasota airport. There it is, directly in line with the runway, and just 2 miles away.
It could have had a cloaking device that made it invisible from the air.
It's pretty sad that you never consider these possibilities. We need more competent researchers on the truther side.
Anyway, Brian, you still haven't addressed the likelihood that modified attack baboons could have stolen Russian nerve gas and buried it under the Iraqi desert.
I mean, modified attack baboons managed to rig the World Trade Center with micro-nukes. Surely they could steal some chemical weapons.
you think 19 guys mostly in their early twenties can pull off what the best bunch of private mercenaries on earth can't handle?
The problem with that question is that those 19 hijackers did not pull off the same thing as the truthers accuse the US Govt of.
*WTC7
WTC7 is a perfect example for that.
Acccording to the 19 hijackers storey, wWTC7 collapsed due to damage and fires and because of the weakenesses of its unique structure, as was expected by the FDNY. The 19 hijackers did not do anything for it.
In the truther story, WTC7 was rigged with explosives and thermite invisibly while being used 24/7 by its tennants and was demolished secretly in a controlled way during 911, while the whole world was watching.
*Squibs and pulverized concrete *NIST's unwillingness to analyze the collapses
Same here, you imply that the pulverisation and the squibs can't come from a collapse caused by the impact of the planes and the fires.
You imply the same as with wtc7: that the two largest towers in the US, while being operative 24/7, were invisibly rigged with explosives and thermite, which were detonated on 911 secretly, while the whole world was watching, in order to demolish the towers in a controlled way.
While the only thing the hijackers had to do is hijack 1 plane and fly it into the tower..
Figure out what is the easiest to do..
*NORAD sitting its hands "
Which is a lie.
"*The 9/11 Commission's refusal to answer 273 of the widows' 300 questions"
They weren't assigned to answer some list of questions.
"*The DoD's inability to defend itself from a predictable attack on the Pentagon"
In which you imply that the attack by the hijackers was real.
And by which you aren't realizing that the Pentagon is just one of numerous targets for which one could predict an attack.
"*US Intel ignoring warnings from 13 foreign countries, four FBI offices, and the CIA"
Which again implies that 911 was performed by the 19 hijackers, as the official story revealed.
It also implies that the plotting of the attacks wasn't completely in secret. According to you, 18 different sources noticed something of the upcoming attacks.
Yet none noticed your implied government involvement, rigging buildings with bombs and thermite, etc. etc.
"*Condi Rice's perjury in testimony to the 9/11 Commission"
Bladiebla, and so on...
It was only a massive campaign of media intimidation that keeps those hitches from becoming widespread public knowledge.
A fun statement considering the fact that movies like Loose Change were broadcasted on numerous public tv stations around the globe.
Any sarin canisters planted in the desert would have been subject to intense scrutiny by the UN
Not really, as the US could refuse to provide them for scrutiny to the UN.
which would then have found that the stuff was manufactured in the USA--just as the anthrax was found to be from Fort Detrick.
Also a fun statement considering that it wasn't the UN that revealed that information after investigating the anthrax, but the FBI.
This is a perfect example how truthers combine unrelated stuff to bend the truth into their direction.
The DoD's inability to defend itself from a predictable attack on the Pentagon
This one is always one of my favorites, truth hurts, because it's so idiotic. I mean, I know how threatening and hostile the Royal Canadian Air Force is, but I get the feeling that an air attack wasn't something the DoD anticipated needing to defend the Pentagon against, any more than they would need to defend it from being shelled by a battleship.
But on the planet Brian lives on, the Pentagon should have had SAM batteries locked onto civilian jetliners at all times, pre-9/11, which of course would not at all be inviting a disaster given how close National Airport is (not to mention Dulles, BWI, Richmond, Philadelphia, etc.)
A fun statement considering the fact that movies like Loose Change were broadcasted on numerous public tv stations around the globe.
You can still find it on Netflix (I rated it one star). Meanwhile, classic films like John Sayles' "Matewan" aren't available on DVD.
I guess John Sayles is subject to a massive campaign of media intimidation, or something.
Anyway, I'm glad Brian forgot to take his meds today and posted all that gibberish. Normally, he's too cautious to tell us what he really thinks because he knows he'll be ridiculed mercilessly for it. But sometimes, he really lets loose with his hilarious insanity.
I saw an Abby Martin’s interview with Ron Paul on RT and, not surprisingly, the issue of 9/11 came up. She must have hopped off the twoof bandwagon as she didn’t mention any truther crap. There was some discussion of the classified 28 pages of the 9/11 commission report, although she and Paul only discussed whether it might implicate Saudi nationals (they may be right about that).
When she was wallowing in twooferism, she was just as idiotic as the rest but I will say she was the only twoofer who was even remotely good looking, now they don’t even have that.
"Pat, I resisted calls for my premature endorsement of the movie because I was afraid that jew-hatred would be featured."
Delusions of adequacy? I mean, who knows how successful the film would be if it had only had the coveted Brian Good seal of approval?
But as to the Booker school, you are all wet.
The whole Booker School argument is bogus.
First of all, the terrorists were attacking landmarks, not specific people.
The main difference between the two is that a landmark is static. It isn't going anywhere. While the president can be at any place at any time. Anything can happen: change of schedule, meeting cancelled, delays, etc. etc..
Also, as soon as the US realized it was under attack, one can expect that the president is rushed to safety. So targeting the president after hitting 2 other targets is not very likely..
Also, the argument the secret service considered the president to be save (because they were behind the attacks) is bogus.
As we all know, the president was rushed to Air Force One and stayed in the air for quite some time, before transporting the president to a save command bunker.
None of that would be necessary if the US was behind the attacks and the president wasn't in danger after all.
And last but not least: if the US govt planned the attacks, why would they send the president to some elementary school during those attacks, making him look like a complete speechless dumb-ass in front of the camera when he was informed about the attacks, in stead of providing him a stage in which he could show himself as a strong leader that would lead the people through the oncoming uncertainties.
th, how do you know who and what the terrorists targeted?
I bet you don't even know about Longboat Keys, let alone about the stinger missiles there and the white van there.
Of course the issue is not what you think you know, the issue is what the Secret Service knew. Do you think that after the white van incident and after a plane hit the north WTC tower they said to themselves "Well, we know the terrorists are targeting buildings and not people, so we know the president is safe here at the school even though he's right under the flight path of Sarasota Int'l and just two miles from the runway"?
You have a bad habit of mistaking your ignorance for knowledge.
Your inability to imagine why making the president look like an idiot would have been part of an inside job only further exhibits your ignorance. Incompetence became the cover story for the intel failure, and for NORAD's failure to provide air defense, for letting Osama walk out of Tora Bora, for two pointless and very expensive wars, and for very expensive no-bid contracts to friends of Bush and Cheney. As it was, even looking like a dumbass his approvals went up from 55% to 90% overnight. Needless to say, I wasn't one of the 90%. I bet you were.
"Well, we know the terrorists are targeting buildings and not people, so we know the president is safe here at the school even though he's right under the flight path of Sarasota Int'l and just two miles from the runway"?
Nobody cares about your obsession with Sarasota. You're a failed janitor who lives with his parents.
You have a bad habit of mistaking your ignorance for knowledge.
Squeal squeal squeal!
Your inability to imagine why making the president look like an idiot would have been part of an inside job only further exhibits your ignorance. Incompetence became the cover story for the intel failure, and for NORAD's failure to provide air defense, for letting Osama walk out of Tora Bora, for two pointless and very expensive wars, and for very expensive no-bid contracts to friends of Bush and Cheney. As it was, even looking like a dumbass his approvals went up from 55% to 90% overnight. Needless to say, I wasn't one of the 90%. I bet you were.
I see Brian still hasn't take his meds yet. I imagine we'll have a week long period of silence from Brian soon, since these hysterical outbursts are usually followed by him being sent back to the mental hospital, where he has no internet access.
how do you know who and what the terrorists targeted? ,
I know because i don't live in some imagined parallel universe like you and am capable to do my own research using sources around the hijackers and their aides.
I bet you don't even know about Longboat Keys, let alone about the stinger missiles there and the white van there.
Your usual bladiebla...
Of course the issue is not what you think you know
Indeed, yet it frustrates you what i know about 911 and what you don't, hence the above babbling of you...
the issue is what the Secret Service knew.
Indeed.
Do you think that after the white van incident and after a plane hit the north WTC tower they said to themselves "Well, we know the terrorists are targeting buildings and not people, so we know the president is safe here at the school even though he's right under the flight path of Sarasota Int'l and just two miles from the runway"?
If you paid any attention, you would have known that Bush was rushed to air force one, that the plane took off and was kept in the air for quite some time, protecting the president against possible attacks. And when the plane finally landed, Bush was brought to a bunker for further safety.
So no: the secret service didn't believe it was safe to keep the president at the elementary school.
That is something the truther movement as made up in order to get more support for their lies, and in 2014, you still endorse that phantasy of the truther movement.
You have a bad habit of mistaking your ignorance for knowledge.
The usual truther bladiebla: you see your self as the almighty beholder of the truth, therefore everyone else must be ignorant or worse..
Your inability to imagine
This is not about making up phantasies, brian, not about imagining things.
It is all about the facts.
why making the president look like an idiot would have been part of an inside job
Yeah, right: the Bush administration created an inside job in which they made the president look like a chimp...
That sure would make his position stronger :o)
Well, i guess that is the beauty of imagining things. Anything is possible..
Incompetence became the cover story for the intel failure
Ah, so you believe that is a lie too.
Quit funny considering that you are the one babbling about 18 intel sources that noticed the plotting of the attacks.
You continue to go round in circles, contradicting yourself as you go..
and for NORAD's failure to provide air defense
Norad wasn't prepared for this type of attack inside the US, so no mystery here, besides the fabricated mystery of the truther movement..
, for letting Osama walk out of Tora Bora,
he wasn't in Tora Bora during the attacks, so no one let him walk out.
Another truther phantasy of you..
for two pointless and very expensive wars
The intervention in Afghanistan wasn't pointless, the US and coalition successfully destroyed the breeding ground for terrorism in that country. The amount of terrorist attacks against the US was building up in the 90's, it went significcaly down the next decade.
The war in Iraq wasn't about terrorism, so that argument is again bogus.
Even more, these arguments for making the president look like a chimp during the inside job are completely bogus.
and for very expensive no-bid contracts to friends of Bush and Cheney.aking the president look like a chimp has noth.
Which, according to you, they would not have gotten if the president was portrait as a strong leader, in stead of a chimp?
More bogus arguments..
As it was, even looking like a dumbass his approvals went up from 55% to 90% overnight.
Which proves even more that the US doesn't need a inside job plot as complicated and detailed as 911 was: as soon as the US is under attack, the people close their ranks and unite as one.
Needless to say, I wasn't one of the 90%. I bet you were.
i don't live in your country, he wasn't my president.
You are very bad at betting, Brian...
Perhaps of interest, some 'researcher' believes he has figured out a fifth plane on 911 that was targeting air force one.
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/the-fifth-plane-of-9-11-threat-to-air-force-one.4600/
th, Bush was not "rushed" to Air Force One. Instead he sat on his ass at that school until after the Pentagon strike.
Of course if he HAD been rushed to Air Force One everyone would wonder why he didn't order NORAD to defend DC. And if he did order aier defense for DC, the Pentagon strike could not have happened.
You don't know what you're talking about.
th, Bush was not "rushed" to Air Force One. Instead he sat on his ass at that school until after the Pentagon strike.
Of course if he HAD been rushed to Air Force One everyone would wonder why he didn't order NORAD to defend DC. And if he did order aier defense for DC, the Pentagon strike could not have happened.
You don't know what you're talking about.
Nobody cares about the idle speculation of a mentally ill unemployed janitor who can't afford a decent haircut.
Hey Brian. Did you know I spent last night crank calling Laurie Van Auken? I mocked her for relying on a failed janitor who lives with his parents to try to get her questions answered. I told her that all you do is post spam about magic thermite elves here, and then I counted the number of days since her questions were submitted, i.e. the number of days of total failure on your part. HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!
everyone would wonder why he didn't order NORAD to defend DC.
Yet another fun statement considering that planes were scrambled to defend the kapital and that St Andrews was busy getting their planes in the air too, including AWACS planes.
Also a fun statement considering that Cheney did order to shoot down any stray plane flying towards DC
You should stop imagining things and stick to the truth in stead, Brian...
"you think 19 guys mostly in their early twenties can pull off what the best bunch of private mercenaries on earth can't handle?"
Guys mostly in their twenties make up the US Army Rangers and Navy SEALs, and the majority of street gangs. 9/11 wasn't anywhere are hard as anything those folks do on any given day.
"*WTC7 "
No mystery. Next.
"*Squibs and pulverized concrete "
Only slack-jawed dipshit redneck morons believe there were squib. Pulverized concrete is a non-issue
"*NIST's unwillingness to analyze the collapses"
Except that they did, you are just too stupid to understand their work.
"*NORAD sitting its hands"
This is a lie
"*The 9/11 Commission's refusal to answer 273 of the widows' 300 questions"
Because they had nothing to do with the attacks.
"*The DoD's inability to defend itself from a predictable attack on the Pentagon"
The only likely threat to the Pentagon before 9/11 was an ICBM, and those are hard to shoot down.
"*US Intel ignoring warnings from 13 foreign countries, four FBI offices, and the CIA"
Blah, blah, blah...we've covered this. Hell, the Boston Bombers were guys that the FSB had called the FBI about, and even after 9/11 the FBI dropped the ball.
"*Condi Rice's perjury in testimony to the 9/11 Commission"
Testifying while black? Testifying while a woman?
"Lots of hitches. It was only a massive campaign of media intimidation that keeps those hitches from becoming widespread public knowledge."
Yeah, but no. Not in the real world.
"Any sarin canisters planted in the desert..."
Sarin? We did go there for Sarin, we went for VX. Sarin is easy enough to make. VX is another matter.
"...would have been subject to intense scrutiny by the UN..."
The UN? The same UN who couldn't make up their mind about Iraq having WMDs in the fist place? The UN who fled Iraq in 2003?
Your reasoning skills are lagging.
" The Booker school was highly unique among local area schools in that it was just 2 miles away from the Sarasota airport--and directly in line with the runways. Contrary to your claims, it was easily identifiable from the air by its proximity to landmarks such as railroad tracks, a golf course, and an eccentric "bullseye" pattern in the housing development nearby."
First,flying a plane is easy for you because you are an idiot.
Second, the 9/11 hijackers trained for months to hit the WTC and D.C. and when the Planes Plan was initiated, Clinton was still in office and nobody knew Bush would be in Florida on that day until a few weeks before.
Third, there is reason to believe that the hijackers didn't get their go-order until a few days before. Hitting a moving target is a bigger risk than a stationary one.
Fourth - The plane that hit the Pentagon flew that tight turn. Any pilot looking it this knows it was because HE MISSED THE PENTAGON ON HIS INITIAL APPROACH.
"th, how do you know who and what the terrorists targeted? "
Because they hit 3 out of 4.
Because they hit 3 out of 4.
Yeah, of all the moronic things Brian said, this might have been the funniest. No Brian, we have no idea what they were targeting. I'm sure AA 11 and UA 175 were supposed to hit downtown Rochester, NY and the campus of Williams College, but they got lost and decided, "well, there's the WTC towers, we'll just hit those".
I'm sure AA 77 made a wrong turn at the Shenandoah River and ended up in DC when it was trying for Sarasota.
Fourth - The plane that hit the Pentagon flew that tight turn. Any pilot looking it this knows it was because HE MISSED THE PENTAGON ON HIS INITIAL APPROACH.
And he allmost crashed the plane on the lown on his second approach..
That is the fun with truthers: they emphasize their fact that Hanjour was a bad pilot, but at the same time they deny all evidence for that in the way he was flying AA77...
OT, but has Brian told you all about the sock puppet he's been using on Democratic Underground and various other sites?
That would mean that he was telling the truth over here, and that would be something out of the ordinary for him...
We've not "met," but I'm not a troll, just an ordinary lurker. I bumped into Brian at my usual hang out at Raw Story. They ran a truther story a couple weeks ago that drew in all manner of wackos including your Brian.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/09/truthers-commemorate-911-with-times-square-ad-showing-wtc-7-imploding-on-infinite-loop/comments/
He posted as ACE ACME. Of course he vehemently denied that he's Brian, but a quick comparison of his posts here, and at DU and several other sites, leaves little doubt. I have a text file with snippets of those posts if anyone is interested. Nobody, but nobody on the internet besides him bangs on about "273 out of 300 questions," or "Name one engineer not affiliated with NIST who officially supports their conclusions."
He also posted as ACE ACME over at DU after they banned petgoat. Not sure whether I should out him over there.
CD, Abby Martin did 28 minutes on 9/11 on 9/11, opening with the observation that there are a whole lot of questions that remain unanswered about why the government did not prevent the attacks. She sounds like a prett6y solid truther to me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmnMEOsuj58
She also appeared on Jesse Ventura's program, opening with the observation that the media and the Democrats seem to believe that Busy lied about everything else, but about 9/11 he rold the truth and we're supposed to believe that story.
In history almost every impetus for military action, she says, is based on some kind of even that was not the way the public is told, she says.
She sounds like a truther to me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6yi7XMrlEiU
Maybe if you based your remarks more in empiricism and less in dogma they would be more useful.
MGF seems to think that outsmarting the best-funded intelligence apparatus and the best-funded military defense in the world is child's play. But then MGF thinks he's smarter than the CIA, and that he proves it every day by refusing to complete his college degree.
NIST did not analyze the towers' collapses. They stated that emphatically. MGF makes silly claims based on his ignorant assumptions.
Pulverized concrete is an issue, and if you understood the first law of thermodynamics as you should have gotten it in first-year chemistry, you would know that.
Oh it's a lie that NORAD sat on its hands? Sitting on the tarmac, flying out to sea--that wasn't sitting it its hands?
If the only likely threat to the Pentagon was an ICBM, why did they do disaster drills based on a plane crash scenario, and why did they armor the exterior wall in the western wing? Al Qaeda's plot to fly a hijacked airliner into the Pentagon had been known since 1995. You make up your facts.
Condi perjured herself while black. Perjured herself while a woman. Race and gender are not defenses to perjury last I checked.
Your facile and ignorant comments fool only the simple-minded, but I guess they're enough to keep you believing your own bullshit.
MGF seems to think that outsmarting the best-funded intelligence apparatus and the best-funded military defense in the world is child's play.
All bogus arguments, Brian..
But then MGF thinks he's smarter than the CIA
The CIA is all about foreign intelligence, the attacks took place inside the US and were the responsibility of the intelligence of the FBI.
As investigations have revealed, the main weakness in the US intelligence is that all the different agencies were competing with each other and unwilling to share all their information.
As you pointed out earlier (and probably regret), the terrorists didn't outsmart the intelligence agencies. 18 sources had spotted them and reported about it.
NIST did not analyze the towers' collapses.
They did, you can read it in their report..
They stated that emphatically.
Nope, that is just the usual truther quote mining.
Pulverized concrete is an issue,
It is not.
Wether the columns failed due to failure or by aide of thermite/explosives, that would not make any difference for the pulverizing of concrete.
and if you understood the first law of thermodynamics as you should have gotten it in first-year chemistry, you would know that.
Not that you understand that first law.
That is why you only mention the law and fail to explain to others you believe don't onderstand the first law of thermodynamics what they are missing.
Oh it's a lie that NORAD sat on its hands?
Indeed, and you just admitted it:
Sitting on the tarmac, flying out to sea--that wasn't sitting it its hands?
Nope.
You aren't flying when you sit on your hands, brian.
If the only likely threat to the Pentagon was an ICBM, why did they do disaster drills based on a plane crash scenario
Like you said: disaster drills.
The pentagon is closed to Reagan Airport, thus a plane crash disaster is something that they considered.
, and why did they armor the exterior wall in the western wing?
As you could see on 911: the armor of the exterior wall did not stop the plane from flying in.
If you did any thinking for yourself in stead of babbling what others wrote on internet, you would have realized that the armor wasn't meant to prevent an attack using passenger planes.
Al Qaeda's plot to fly a hijacked airliner into the Pentagon had been known since 1995.
You make things up as you go...
Your facile and ignorant comments fool only the simple-minded, but I guess they're enough to keep you believing your own bullshit.
The usual bladiebla...
We've not "met," but I'm not a troll, just an ordinary lurker.
I didn't see you as a troll. The only troll on LC is Brian as far as i'm concerned. I have been a lurker myself for several years and started reading the comments lately.
I noticed how others responded to Brian and how discussions with him went around in circles. I wondered if it was possible to start a 'normal' conversation with him about 911.
And guess what: it isn't.
Brian is a perfect example of why the 911 truth movement hasn't achieved anything in the 13 years after 911.
I bumped into Brian at my usual hang out at Raw Story. They ran a truther story a couple weeks ago that drew in all manner of wackos including your Brian.
He posted as ACE ACME. Of course he vehemently denied that he's Brian, but a quick comparison of his posts here, and at DU and several other sites, leaves little doubt.
He cannot deny being Brian on this blog, but still denies any reference to him on the internet...
"He also posted as ACE ACME over at DU after they banned petgoat. Not sure whether I should out him over there."
He broke the rules by reassigning using a different name, so i think you should report him.
I bumped into Brian at my usual hang out at Raw Story.
Is see he is getting slapped around by Hans Meyer, who is quite persistent in defeating Brian on his own grounds..
Yes, th. MGF's arguments are completely bogus. That's my point.
Maybe if you would think more and write less, you wouldn't confuse yourself so much.
@Brian:
You failed to make that point.
Maybe if you would think more and write less, you wouldn't confuse yourself so much.
The usual mirror talk, Brian...
MGF's arguments are completely bogus.
You even failed in repeating his arguments correctly.
You had to bend them to make them look bogus..
Yes, th. MGF's arguments are completely bogus. That's my point.
Nobody cares what your "point" is, Brian. You're a failed janitor who lives with his parents.
Out of curiosity, Brian, do you get ridiculed as mercilessly as ACE ACME at DU as you did as petgoat? Did you re-post your "meatball on a fork" scribbles there so everyone could laugh at you?
Frito Pendejo, Brian is well known for having multiple IDs all over the internet.
For instance, he posted thousands of pages of spam at CIT, and got banned. Then he came back as "Watson", and posted thousands of more pages of spam there, and got banned again.
He also has multiple IDs on youtube which he used to post homosexual stalker spam about Willie Rodriguez. One is "punxsutawneybarney", another is "truetruther". He may have others, since Brian typically gets banned everywhere he posts.
Lyin Ianinny, I never posted anything at CIT, let alone thousands of pages of spam.
First of all, Brian, you have no job, no friends, no family, and no interests. All you do all day is post spam about magic thermite elves and/or your homosexual obsession with Willie Rodriguez all over the internet.
Second, you've been pwn3d again, Brian:
http://truthandshadows.wordpress.com/2011/02/06/the-assault-on-cit-who-is-really-undermining-911-truth/
What's hilarious about your pathetic lies, Brian, is how easy it is to point them out. You constantly babble about people needing to Google, yet you never seem to figure out that people can Google you and easily find out that you're a liar who was banned from the truth movement and can't afford a decent haircut.
"MGF seems to think that outsmarting the best-funded intelligence apparatus and the best-funded military defense in the world is child's play."
Um, you mean that best-funded intelligence apparatus that never penetrated the Soviet Politburo, never saw the fall of the Berlin Wall coming, and thought that Iraq had WMDs? That intelligence apparatus?
The best funded military defense that failed to train for counter insurgency even though the majority of US wars have featured CI? That same military force that, in spite of J-Stars and drones drove head-long into a Republican Guard tank division in OIF? The same military that didn't bother to secure or destroy Iraqi ammo dumps and left them for the insurgents to clean out?
Look, I love the military but they have HUGE blind spots. Even today they are cleaning house of their veteran commanders and promoting officers and NCOs who managed not to have and combat experience.
The CIA has never been really good.
Ian, I have never posted spam about magic or elves. You seem to confuse your own actions with mine. You don't know my job situation. I am paid for results, not for "time served", my work is stressful, and it relaxes me to stop in now and then to slap down some idiot 9/11 liars.
CIT never pwned me. About all CIT does these days is issue occasional claims that they are boycotting the 9/11 conferences to which they were not invited.
MGF, the CIA did not think Iraq had WMDs. That's why Cheney had to engage in unprecedented interference in CIA operations. The Brewster-Jennings unit actually blocked an attempt by parties unknown to smuggle WMDs into Iraq. Some people suspect that the WH targeted Val Plame and the Brewster-Jennings unit for destruction precisely because they knew about that attempted import.
Al Qaa Qaa, like 9/11, appears to be a "dumb mistake" that actually turned out to be of enormous benefit to the military-industrial complex.
You need to think deeper. If you love the military, you should sign up while you still can. Castroville is rotting your brain.
The problem with your reasoning is that you imply that govt agencies are 100% infallible.
While in reality, they are far from that.
The latest scandal about a disturbed veteran who was able to enter the most guarded building in the world, the White House, and was able to walk around in it for a while is a good example of that.
What you are showing, Brian, is nothing more then desperate attempts to make yourself legit by 'proving' that everyone is wrong and that you are right about 911 being an inside job..
Al Qaa Qaa, like 9/11, appears to be a "dumb mistake" that actually turned out to be of enormous benefit to the military-industrial complex.
Both aren't mistakes, Brian.
my work is stressful, and it relaxes me to stop in now and then to slap down some idiot 9/11 liars.
So your job frustrates you and you need someone to abreact that on others, and you do that online against people with a different opinion...
End you end up being slapped around on numerous websites...
Some life you have...
my work is stressful, and it relaxes me to stop in now and then to slap down some idiot 9/11 liars.
So your whole 'concern' for the 911 widows and their questions is all bullshit.
All you want out of these discussions is to get rid of the frustrations you experience at your work...
th, please stop trying to interpret my statements, and do not try to tell me what I imply. You are incompetent to do so.
The more you urge me to stop, the more you encourage me to go on.
All right. Please go on demonstrating your intellectual incompetence. It's surely no secret to you that you're not very bright.
You are the one being slammed around on several blogs, Brian. Not me.
You are the one getting so frustrated with his job that he starts to like being slammed around on blogs like these, not me..
You are the one who turned Willy into a hero on this blog while trying to do the opposite, nor me.
Nobody's slamming me, and I don't have the power to turn a lying maggot like Willie Rodriguez into a hero even if I wanted to.
You'd better find someone smarter to write your material for you.
Nobody's slamming me
I guess you got used to it..
and I don't have the power to turn a lying maggot like Willie Rodriguez into a hero even if I wanted to.
There is no power involved.
People see right through you and rather execpt the opposite of what you are stating.
You'd better find someone smarter to write your material for you.
The usual mirror talk..
I hope you have a better day at work, leaving you less frustrated..
Your belief that "stressful" is the same thing as "frustrating" is quite revealing, th.
"MGF, the CIA did not think Iraq had WMDs."
No?
1998:
https://www.cia.gov/library/reports/archived-reports-1/jan_jun1998.html#iraq
1999:
https://www.cia.gov/library/reports/archived-reports-1/july_dec1999.htm#4
2000:
https://www.cia.gov/library/reports/archived-reports-1/july_dec2000.htm#4
January, 2001:
https://www.cia.gov/library/reports/archived-reports-1/jan_jun2001.htm#4
July, 2001:
https://www.cia.gov/library/reports/archived-reports-1/july_dec2001.htm#4
January, 2002:
https://www.cia.gov/library/reports/archived-reports-1/jan_jun2002.html#4
See what I did there? I backed up my claim with easily accessed facts that anybody can read...assuming they're not an idiot.
" The Brewster-Jennings unit actually blocked an attempt by parties unknown to smuggle WMDs into Iraq. Some people suspect that the WH targeted Val Plame and the Brewster-Jennings unit for destruction precisely because they knew about that attempted import."
So someone tried to smuggle WMDs into Iraq...and you ignore this.
You are a special kind of stupid.
"Al Qaa Qaa, like 9/11, appears to be a "dumb mistake" that actually turned out to be of enormous benefit to the military-industrial complex. "
1. The defense contractors aren't going anywhere, and weren't going anywhere in 2001.
2.Counter Terrorism involves mostly finance interdiction, and maybe a drone strike or a visit from SOF. Not big $$ in counter terrorism. A resurgent Russia and an emerging China? There's where the big bucks are going to be.
3. Prior to 9/12/2001, terrorism was a law enforcement problem, not a national security problem, and the CIA is a national security tool not law enforcement.
Your lack of knowledge basic facts is breathtaking.
Ask Brian about the Pentagon and watch him squeal with excitement as he dodges and weaves a tapestry of bullshit this blog has yet to see.
MGF, the intelligence the CIA had was "sexed up". The top brass pretended they believed stuff that their subordinates warned them was hooey, and they believed stuff they had no right to believe.
Ray McGovern tells the sordid tale here: http://consortiumnews.com/2013/02/04/colin-powell-conned-or-con-man/
You don't know my job situation.
False.
I am paid for results, not for "time served", my work is stressful, and it relaxes me to stop in now and then to slap down some idiot 9/11 liars.
Yes, I imagine posting endless dumbspam all over the internet and being ridiculed mercilessly by sane people all day is stressful. However, that's not a "job". If you had a job, you wouldn't have to live with your parents and you could afford a decent haircut.
Ian, you don't know my job situation, my living situation, or my financial situation. Your belief that you know things that you do not know shows you to be intellectually incompetent.
No mystery, therefore, as to why you are so confused about 9/11.
Ian, you don't know my job situation, my living situation, or my financial situation. Your belief that you know things that you do not know shows you to be intellectually incompetent.
No mystery, therefore, as to why you are so confused about 9/11.
Brian, I've won on 9/11. Your widows will never have their questions answered. HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!!
"MGF, the intelligence the CIA had was "sexed up". The top brass pretended they believed stuff that their subordinates warned them was hooey, and they believed stuff they had no right to believe."
This is a lie.
The time frame I presented also matched USCOM's problems with the Iraqis while trying to dismantle their WMD cache, and VERIFY its destruction
The main reason we know you're lying is that THE IRAQI ARMY believed they had WMDs, and were not told until a dew days into the invasion.
Saddam played a good shell game, that's all.
Why would Saddam tell the Iraqi army that they didn't have WMDs?
What is USCOM? Is that something some barfly at Franco's told you about?
Obviously the USA knew that Saddam had no WMD. American troops massed at the Kuwait-Iraq border before the invasion would have been very vulnerable to WMD attack.
Your belief that "stressful" is the same thing as "frustrating" is quite revealing, th.
It was indeed revealing to hear that your frustration about your work is the source for your harrassement.
You admitted that after a day work, you get so tense that you have to slam down people.
That is quite disturbing, Brian.
I should seek help.
Who know what will happen if slamming down people on the internet doesn't do the trick for you anymore.
Why would Saddam tell the Iraqi army that they didn't have WMDs?
He didn't, you moron. Read what Marc Ferris said.
What is USCOM?
Brian, there's this amazing tool called Google that can help you find these things out. Maybe if you knew how to use it, you wouldn't be so confused about 9/11.
Also, you can use that magic Google thing to find a good barber, who will fix your hideous haircut.
American troops massed at the Kuwait-Iraq border before the invasion would have been very vulnerable to WMD attack.
This would have been true in 1991 as well, when Iraq had WMDs and had used them.
You fail again, Brian.
th, I didn't say anything about "frustration" at work. I said "stress". You interpreted "stress" as "frustration", and as I said, this is quite revealing.
I slam down liars. Some of them then recognize that they don't know what they're talking about, and they quit lying. Others, like you and Ian, just come right back with more lies.
Ian, I didn't say that Saddam would tell the Iraw army that he didn't have WMDs. I asked MGF a rhetorical question to neutralize MGF's claim that the fact that the Iraqi army believed they had WMDs was significant. Glad I could clear that up for you. Try to keep up.
Ian, what is USCOM?
Ummm, Ian, the USA did not invade Iraq in 1991. Try to keep up.
th, I didn't say anything about "frustration" at work.
i know, but since you are a liar, the exact words don't mean anything.
I said "stress". You interpreted "stress" as "frustration"
Indeed.
People with stressfull jobs don't look around for others thay can slam down during their free time.
People who get frustrated do.
It is quite disturbing to see how frustrated you really are. I'm affraid what might happen when you no longer get your kick from slamming people down online and start looking for other means to get a kick.
and as I said, this is quite revealing.
It is indeed and explains why people don't give you 1 inch on internet.
I slam down liars.
No you don't.
That is the odd thing about it.
You only slam down people with another view or opinion than you.
liars like griffin and gage aren't slamed down by you. You simply hide their lies by saying that they only make educated guesses, give opinions, etc. etc..
Some of them then recognize that they don't know what they're talking about
So they are not lying.
Others, like you and Ian, just come right back with more lies.
Like i said earlier, i wondered if it was possible to get a normal conversation with you.
But seems impossible.
You see yourself as some holy caretaker of the truth and anyone who disagrees with you is therefore a liar and needs to be slammed down..
Ian, I didn't say that Saddam would tell the Iraw army that he didn't have WMDs.
Yes you did.
I asked MGF a rhetorical question to neutralize MGF's claim that the fact that the Iraqi army believed they had WMDs was significant.
And you failed doing so.
Glad I could clear that up for you.
Which you haven't.
But that was to be expected.
Ian, what is USCOM?
learn how to use google.
Ummm, Ian, the USA did not invade Iraq in 1991. Try to keep up.
Typical red herring, Brian.
As if that has anything to do with it.
th, your 15-watt posts are a waste of time to read and a waste of time to write.
Ian, I didn't say that Saddam would tell the Iraw army that he didn't have WMDs. I asked MGF a rhetorical question to neutralize MGF's claim that the fact that the Iraqi army believed they had WMDs was significant. Glad I could clear that up for you. Try to keep up.
This is the kind of incoherent babbling I've come to expect from Brian.
Ian, what is USCOM?
I see you still don't know how to Google. No wonder you know nothing about 9/11 or Iraq.
Ummm, Ian, the USA did not invade Iraq in 1991.
See what I mean?
Ian, I know how to google. I can't find any mention of USCOM. If you know how to google, why can't you tell us what USCOM is?
I'm sorry that you find "I asked a rhetorical question to neutralize MGF's claim" to be "incoherent", but that's not my fault. Is the problem that you don't know what a rhetorical question is?
Ian, I know how to google. I can't find any mention of USCOM. If you know how to google, why can't you tell us what USCOM is?
You don't know how to Google. Otherwise you'd know what USCOM is. And how to find photos of Willie Rodriguez with the Clintons. And realize what a ass you've made of yourself all over the internet, with your thousands of pages of homosexual stalker spam, and your endless bannings from various message boards and groups. And, of course, photos of you walking around in public with a hideous homeless mullet.
I'm sorry that you find "I asked a rhetorical question to neutralize MGF's claim" to be "incoherent", but that's not my fault. Is the problem that you don't know what a rhetorical question is?
Poor Brian. I've humiliated him again and he's squealing and crying.
Hey Brian, you know what else is humiliating to you? You STILL haven't gotten the widows' questions answered. HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!!
More lyin Iananity from lyin Ianinny, I see.
Post a Comment
<< Home