Gold to Chomsky: Yes, I'm a Kook, But You Don't Have to Be
Jon posts his correspondence with the Noamster over at Flogger. As usual, he starts out Mr I Just Have Questions:
Again, I'm not going to talk to you about theories. I want to primarily talk about how important it is to acknowledge that we were lied to about 9/11, and how important it is for those with a voice to do their best to inform the public of that.But it's not long before he gets into the kookery:
It's not about proving that the Government did it. Unfortunately, there is information that exists out there that suggests such a thing. I didn't create this information out of thin air. It is not a figment of my imagination.No, it's largely a figment of the imagination of Nico Haupt, Rosalee Grable, and all the other original researchers who came up with this crap. Gold has contributed nothing to the movement but his creation of the "limited hangout" where one pretends not to be a conspiracy theorist while really being a CT nutbar inside.
posted by Pat @ 6:41 PM
84 comments
84 Comments:
Pat, the most powerful military establishment in the history of the world failed to defeat an al Qaeda plot that had been known to US authorities since 1995, for which warnings were received from 13 foreign countries and 4 FBI offices and the CIA. The Mossad warnings even named names of alleged 9/11 perps--including two who were known al Qaeda agents known by the FBI and the CIA to be inside the USA and who bought 10 airline tickets dated 9/11/01 under their own real names (according to Bob Woodward).
That is not a figment of anyone's imagination. That is an established fact.
According to a Zogby poll, 49% of NYC residents believe that elements of the federal administration "knew in advance that attacks were planned on or around September 11, 2001, and that they consciously failed to act."
That is not Rosalee Grable and Nico Haupt. That is 49% of NYC residents.
In the period before 9/11, I remember hearing the phrase "It's not a matter of IF, it's a matter if WHEN"...over and over again. Yes, intelligence was recieved (and in some cases, intelligence wasn't taken seriously enough), but it's like being told by a psychic that someone you know will die...if you dont have SPECIFICS, its hard to do anything about it! WHERE and WHEN was this attack/attacks going to happen??
Specifics were known. Hijacked airliners. WTC, Pentagon, Sears Tower, TransAmerica Pyramid. Named names.
Oh good. In the two months since the last post on this blog, it appears Brian Good finally received the psychiatric care that he's desperately needed for the last 4+ decades. Now he no longer believes the towers were destroyed by magic spray-on thermite and invisible silent explosives. He acknowledges that bin Laden was responsible.
How else has your life improved since May, Brian? Are you actually holding down a job now? Did you get rid of that hideous haircut? Did you stop posting homosexual stalker spam about Willie Rodriguez everywhere?
I assure you, Nico Haupt and Rosalee Grable have never influenced me at all.
Chomsky can be quite acidic at times. His patience with this person is remarkable. And this person just throws at Chomsky all sorts of pretty dubious stuff and Chomsky's reply is that he has heard it all before, it isn't credible and stop pestering me, (Wasting my time.).
What exactly was dubious about what Mr. Gold said? And when did Dr. Chomsky say it wasn't credible?
What exactly was dubious about what Mr. Gold said?
Everything.
And when did Dr. Chomsky say it wasn't credible?
Everywhere.
Anyway, Brian, you didn't answer my above questions. Now that you've received the psychiatric care you've needed for so long, have you gotten a job? A decent haircut? Have you stopped stalking Willie Rodriguez?
You don't want me telling Laurie Van Auken that you refuse to answer questions, do you?
the most powerful military establishment in the history of the world
Which isn't true.
failed to defeat an al Qaeda plot
It wasn't designed to defeat terrorist plots.
that had been known to US authorities since 1995
Not true, the plot does not originate in 1995 or prior that date.
Proving once again that it wasn't an inside job, but an attack performed by terrorists.
That is not a figment of anyone's imagination. That is an established fact.
It is indeed an established fact that 911 was performed by the 19 hijackers and that the intelligence services had knowledge of that. It is also an established fact that because of rivalry between the different intelligence agencies the information remained shattered and did not lead to real understanding of the attacks.
According to a Zogby poll
And your point is?
49% of NYC residents believe that elements of the federal administration "knew in advance that attacks were planned on or around September 11, 2001, and that they consciously failed to act."
I doubt that even 49% of the NYC residents answered any quesions in that poll.
That is 49% of NYC residents.
Nope, it is not.
Specifics were known. Hijacked airliners. WTC, Pentagon, Sears Tower, TransAmerica Pyramid. Named names.
Which plane crashed into the Sears Tower?
Which plane crashed into the TransAmerica Pyramid?
And you failed to mention the date and which airliners were going to be hijacked.
th, your counterfactual claims do not deserve a response. You lie.
Your usual mirror talk, Brian.
As expected.
th, your counterfactual claims do not deserve a response.
Brian's been pwn3d again. At least, after 6 years of posting hysterial spam here, he's beginning to realize that the less he posts, the less people can humiliate him.
I always love when these rubes post facts that show how nonsensical their claims are, then run away from those facts. Just b/c we all know how Brian is, I will answer "GMS, what facts am I running away from?"ahead of time.
The questions about the Sears Tower, etc.
I don't even know why you would suggest I was influenced by Nico Haupt and Rosalee Grable. It's well documented that I fought against the ideas of both for a long time. There was no book or movie that brought me into this. I came into this all on my own.
Jon, these clowns will suggest anything that keeps their illusions alive.
GMS, I didn't run away from anything.
Lyin Ian, your Lyin Iananity is noted.
th, "mirrortalk" is not as profound as you think. It's just a variation on "I know you are but what am I?" which most children abandoned by the time they were 8 years old.
I miss Nico Haupt. He was an entertaining character. Now, it's just pathetic dregs of society like Jon Gold and Brian Good who make up the remains of the truth movement.
Anyone know what happened to Nico?
Ianinny you WOULD miss Nico Haupt. Nobody else does.
GMS, I didn't run away from anything.
Then please copy paste where you answered the following:
Which plane crashed into the Sears Tower?
Which plane crashed into the TransAmerica Pyramid?
Or keep running in circles. Your choice.
I never said any planes crashed into Sears Tower or TransAmerica Pyramid.
th, "mirrortalk" is not as profound as you think
No, it is just you projecting yourself on the person you reply to.
Like talking to yourself in the mirror.
Anyway, the specifics of the attacks were known according to you.
Sears tower, TransAmerica Pyramid....
But you also acknowledge that the attacks did not involve those buildings...
So how specific was the information?
The information was specific about attacks using hijacked airliners. A number of possible targets were identified. All of the 9/11 targets were on the list of possible targets.
I'm not projecting myself on anything--least of all you. When I criticize you for lying no projection is involved.
So not as specific as you first claimed.
And we know that you are in denial about yourself, brian.
You don't have to point that out.
Poor Brian. He's hysterical because Nico Haupt was an innovator and a pioneer in researching 9/11, while Brian is a failed janitor who was banned from the truth movement for stalking the widows.
The information was specific about attacks using hijacked airliners. A number of possible targets were identified. All of the 9/11 targets were on the list of possible targets.
It's good to see Brian arguing so forcefully in favor of the fact that bin Laden was responsible for 9/11.
Brian, depending upon what drugs the psychiatrists gave you, you may not remember how you used to be, but you used to embarrass yourself constantly by babbling about magic spray-on thermite and invisible silent explosives being used to destroy the WTC. It was a great source of amusement to all the normal people who post here.
I think he never backed away from the sprayon thermite.
AFAIK his current theory is that hijackers did fly the plane, but were taken over by remote controlled drones, while sprayon thermite finished the job.
Why?
Because what the hijackers intended wasn't enough.
So the govt decided to pimp the attacks to make them more devastating.
Specifics were known. The list of potential targets was known. The mode of attack--hijacked airliners--was known.
The Mossad warned of 19 terrorists inside the USA planning something big, and they even named names. Only four of the names have been released. but they included alleged lead hijacker Mohammed Atta; alleged 9/11 pilot Marwan al Shehhi; and two alleged muscle hijackers, Nawaf al Hazmi and Khalid al Mihdhar.
Al Hazmi and al Mihdhar were known al Qaeda agents who had lived with an FBI informant in San Diego. They were known by both the CIA and the FBI to be in the country. Al Mihdhar had lived in a known al Qaeda communications hub in Yemen for a year, a facility that was monitored separately by the CIA and the NSA. He telephoned back to that facility freely when he was in the USA. They bought ten airline tickets dated 9/11/01 under their own real names.
I didn't babble about anything. You guys don't want to talk about 9/11 because you're too lazy to learn anything about 9/11. The ones who had actually had the mental capacity to read some books on the subject (Triterope was one, and sackcloth and ashes was another) all left this place in disgust years ago.
th, I wish you would not try to interpret what I say. I can articulate most of the theories that are out there, and sometimes in discussion I will mention one. The fact that I mention a theory does not mean I believe it. I prefer to do without theories and concentrate on establishing the facts. Premature theorizing corrupts an investigation. Hypothesizing, by contrast, enriches an investigation by suggesting potentially valuable lines of inquiry.
I have been known to mention the remote-controlled planes theory. I have read a book on the subject that claims that as early as 1994, 100 approaches and touchdowns were done with a Boeing 737 aircraft under autopilot control with accuracy within a few centimeters. I have not verified the claim. I do know that the mainstream press reported that in August 2001 Raytheon landed a remote-control 727 six times in the New Mexico desert. Landing is certainly a more complicated procedure than is flying a plane in on a target radio beacon. I am not a proponent of the remote-controlled plane theory, or any other theory, except to say that those who claim it is outlandish or impossible don't know what they're talking about and I believe it is a worthwhile area of investigation.
But you guys don't have the patience for investigations. You want answers right now, and the facts be damned.
Various threats to various targets at various times existed. Your Monday morning quarter backing is not impressive. Don't worry Brian, it is understandable how so many truthers have become no-claimers. It allows them to be safely ensconced away from supporting their beliefs. An investigation already happened. What we have now is a fringe cult who can't be bothered to meet the actual standards of science to show why a new investigation is necessary.
FYI- Theorize and hypothesize are synonyms.
http://www.thesaurus.com/browse/theorize
Brian, none of what you state is new to us.
We knew for years already that al qaeda was behind the attacks and that several intelligence agencies were on top of them.
And as you revealed the information wasn't that specific at all. Various different targets were mentioned.
You also forget that there have been many other leads to possible attacks.
If the US govt responded at every single possible attack the way you would like to see them, the patriot act would be childsplay compared to what the govt would have to do.
Anyway, as others have pointed out, you have brought up the most insane theories yourself. So now you claim that you don't support them.
Ik know about the possibity to remote fly a passenger plane existed at that time.
But what is your point?
Do you still believe that dispite the fact all terrorists were real and the attacks were real, the govt still used the attacks to fly te planes remote?
You never dare to give any insight into what you believe happend on 911.
You claim to have done the most research of us all.
I would expect that you would use that knowledge to the benefit of us all. But you don't. You merely brag about it, presuming that you are smarter than anyone as if this is some peeing contest.
In that respect, you are stil like a truther. Truthers also live with the comfort that they are smarter than any of us and that only they can see the truth...
@Jon Gold
Remind me, Jon, what was it you said about David Ray Grifter in that Amazon review?
GMS, what you regard as "an investigation" failed to answer 91% of the 9/11 widows' questions and claims it did not analyze the collapses of the twin towers. I don't see how any honest person could claim that such investigations were adequate.
Theorize and hypothesize may be synonyms to some people, but to people with sufficient education to know the differences between theories and hypotheses they are not synonyms.
th, what about ten airline tickets dated 9/11/01 bought by two known al Qaeda agents is not specific enough for you? What about the Mossad naming names is not specific enough for you? What about the FBI memo "Kamikaze Pilots" is not specific enough for you?
You talk as if you know and you just make stuff up.
Why do you think there's some conflict between real hijackers and remote piloted planes? Has it never occurred to you that maybe the hijackers didn't know they were on a suicide mission?
I use my research to the benefit of you all--to little effect. As Dorothy Parker said, you can lead a horticulture but you can't make her think.
The hijackers created last will videos, in which they explained their motives for the attacks.
So yes, they knew they would not survive the attack.
Anyway, what is your scenario: hijackers hijack the plane and then the remote control takes over?
And who was responsible for taking over the plane by remote control?
I no longer believe what I did then "Chas." What was that, 2006 or 2007? But even DRG had nothing to do with me becoming involved.
It's a lie to insinuate that Haupt or Grable had any influence on me.
th, which "last will" videos explained the hijackers' motivations for th3e attacks? I think you're making stuff up, as usual.
So you don't know about the hijacker videos?
Looks like you did not investigate 911 as well as you claimed.
And of course, you think so highly of yourself that you don't believe they exist.
Just like with the pictures of William...
I didn't babble about anything. You guys don't want to talk about 9/11 because you're too lazy to learn anything about 9/11. The ones who had actually had the mental capacity to read some books on the subject (Triterope was one, and sackcloth and ashes was another) all left this place in disgust years ago.
My, such squealing!
Yes, Brian, many commenters have left here because they got bored of your endless babbling about the same ridiculous things over and over and over again. I too got bored of trying to reason with you within months. Fortunately, I realized how much fun taunting and humiliating you can be. So that's why I'm still here. I like to remind you that you're a failed janitor who sniffs glue, wears women's underwear, and can't afford a decent haircut. I like to remind you that Willie Rodriguez pwn3d you on this blog. I like to remind you that the widows have no questions. All these things leave you humiliated and squealing hysterically.
GMS, what you regard as "an investigation" failed to answer 91% of the 9/11 widows' questions and claims it did not analyze the collapses of the twin towers.
The widows have no questions.
I don't see how any honest person could claim that such investigations were adequate.
Nobody cares. You're a failed janitor who wears women's underwear.
Theorize and hypothesize may be synonyms to some people, but to people with sufficient education to know the differences between theories and hypotheses they are not synonyms.
Right. Leave that to those of us who didn't fail out of college like you did.
I use my research to the benefit of you all--to little effect.
What "research"? You just mindlessly parrot anything Richard Gage says.
Just an example of Brian mindlessly repeating Richard Gage, Brian used to babble about "pyroclastic flows" at the WTC, because everyone knows that a volcano erupted in lower Manhattan on 9/11. Everyone here taunted Brian mercilessly for that, and Brian responded in his usual manner: hysterical squealing and crying and calling people "girls". Then Brian quietly dropped the whole volcanic eruption under the WTC thing.
And now, it appears he's dropped his obsession with magic thermite elves too. He's adamant that al Qaeda was responsible for 9/11 now. Welcome to planet earth, Brian.
th, I asked you some simple questions. What about ten airline tickets dated 9/11/01 bought by two known al Qaeda agents is not specific enough for you? What about the Mossad naming names is not specific enough for you? What about the FBI memo "Kamikaze Pilots" is not specific enough for you?
You changed the subject. Answer the questions.
I asked you which "last will" videos explained the hijackers' motivations for the attacks. You changed the subject, accusing me of believing the videos do not exist. I believe some videos exist. I don't believe they explain the motivations for the attacks. I think you make stuff up. Answer the question.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Lyin Ianinny, you give us nothing but your usual lyin Iananity. Almost every one of your claims was a blatant lie. Cease and desist your libelous claims.
Willie Rodriguez didn't pwn me on this blog. I proved that his hero story was a lie. I showed that he stole it from Pablo Ortiz, who died on 9/11. Calling Willie out as a con artist is not libel because it's true that he's a con artist. I showed that Der Spiegel wrote that his story was fraudulent, like a con artist trying to pass off a $1 bill as a $20 bill. He ran away.
I didn't babble about pyroclastic flows. I showed that a PhD geophysicist at Cambridge and geologists at Columbia University described the dust clouds at Ground Zero in terms of pyroclastic flows. I have explained this at least five times and you refuse to learn.
I not only wasn't "adamant" that al Qaeda did 9/11, I didn't say they did it, silly. Since, unlike you, I never had an obsession with elves, I could hardly drop such an obsession. Speaking of obsessions, your endless interest in speculating about my underwear is noted. Tell you what, you being so successful and all, maybe you'd like to pay me $100 for my sweaty jockstrap?
I compared your rhetorical gambit to the rhetoric of 8-year-old girls. You seem to think that persistently making stupid claims such as "the widows have no questions" is cute. I have never known a boy-child who thought such behavior was cute. I have known several girl-children who thought so.
You call people girls because you're a massive misogynist.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x4451628
This is the thread that got snug.bug (excuse me, PETGOAT) banned from Democratic Underground, where he acted like a huge douchebag. He hilariously says lines like, "In Frisco good tuna goes begging." and "Queers are God's gift to straight men, that's what I always say." He also claims that advocates for gay marriage were hurting the Democratic party.
Hey snug.bug, I bet the recent gay marriage ruling really pissed you off, huh?
h, I asked you some simple questions.
Must have missed these.
What about ten airline tickets dated 9/11/01 bought by two known al Qaeda agents is not specific enough for you?
No, not specific enough.
which agent were they? Names please.
And in who's name did they buy the tickets? Names please.
Which planes? Names please.
What about the Mossad naming names is not specific enough for you?
Which names did they mention?
You aren't specific enough.
What about the FBI memo "Kamikaze Pilots" is not specific enough for you?
No.
I asked you which "last will" videos explained the hijackers' motivations for the attacks.
all of them.
Did you see them? You would have known the answer if you did.
I believe some videos exist.
You shouldn't believe, you should know it for a fact.
Did you ever watch any of those videos?
If so, what did they hijackers speak about?
I wonder if you will answer those questions.
didn't babble about pyroclastic flows.
No?
I showed that a PhD geophysicist at Cambridge and geologists at Columbia University described the dust clouds at Ground Zero in terms of pyroclastic flows.
So you did babble about pyroclastic flows.
Why did you deny that at first?
Willie Rodriguez didn't pwn me on this blog.
He even pawned you recently.
I proved that his hero story was a lie.
Nope, you haven't shown that in any way.
I showed that he stole it from Pablo Ortiz, who died on 9/11.
So the story was true.
Contradicting yourself once more.
Calling Willie out as a con artist is not libel
You are not entitled to determine what libel is and what not.
I showed that Der Spiegel wrote that his story was fraudulent
Ah, so you find the main stream media credible.
Good to know.
Joseph Smith,
Brian is also a huge racist in addition to being a misogynist, and the Democratic Underground thread shows his homophobia too. No wonder he joined a pseudo-fascist movement like 9/11 truth.
Of course, 9/11 truth is dead, and Brian is the last one left who doesn't know that. He's the Japanese soldier on the isolated island in the 1960s.
"In Frisco good tuna goes begging."
Well, Brian is bitter about the fact that he hasn't gotten laid in over 4 decades because he's unemployed and lives with his parents and is a pervert. It would explain comments like that.
This comment has been removed by the author.
It seems you guys have nothing to contribute about 9/11. You just like to fantasize about my sex life and my underwear.
According to th, an FBI memo entitled Kamikaze Pilots based on information provided by a former Iranian intelligence chief based on his contacts in Baluchistan was not specific enough.
So th thinks it's not specific enough that ten airline tickets dated 9/11/01 were bought under the real names of two known al Qaeda agents who were known by both the FBI and the CIA to be inside the country and according to the warnings the Mossad gave US authorities, were planning something big with Mohammed Atta and another licensed pilot and 15 other guys. Not specific enough.
According to th, an FBI memo entitled Kamikaze Pilots based on information provided by a former Iranian intelligence chief based on his contacts in Baluchistan were not specific enough.
The Mossad named names. I have discussed this repeatedly here. It's not my fault you can't learn. We don't know how many they named, but they said there were 19 of them. The four names that have been released are Mohammed Atta, Marwan al Shehhi, Khalid Almihdhar, and Nawaf Alhazmi.
I didn't babble about anything.
Willie's hero story is blatantly fraudulent. Der Spiegel said it was a con--and libel laws in Europe are much stricter than they are here. Pablo Ortiz's story was true--it was verified by some of the dozens of people he saved. Willie's story was a lie. I'm sorry that's too complicated for you to understand, but that's jnot my fault.
Ian, it seems that you don't know that there is a resolution pending in the Senate calling for the release of the redacted pages in the Joint Inquiry. I know all those big words sound like babble to you, but if you're patient with a dictionary you might be able to figure out what that's about.
Well, Brian, as expected, you did not answer any of my questions.
The information was specific you said, yet you cannot give any details about the information.
That figures.
You also haven't proven that willy his story was fraudulent. That you reside to Der Spiegel proves that.
So th thinks it's not specific enough that ten airline tickets dated 9/11/01 were bought under the real names of two known al Qaeda agents who were known by both the FBI and the CIA to be inside the country and according to the warnings the Mossad gave US authorities, were planning something big with Mohammed Atta and another licensed pilot and 15 other guys. Not specific enough.
Well, not even according to you. You still don't state that 911 was planned and executed by the 19 named hijackers.
So how specific was that information?
Even with the information we now have, you still are unable to determine what happened that day.
th, I can give specifics about the information. I don't see why I should waste my time giving it to you. You can go to historycommons.org just as easily as I can.
You're just playing with words. I said there was specific information in the warnings. I mentioned named names, mode of attack, targets. That was specific. Even the date was specific if anyone had bothered to run a credit card report on two known al Qaeda agents known to be inside the USA.
I have proven many times on this blog that Willie's story is fraudulent. It seems you lack the ability to learn.
Our inability to determine what happened that day is why we need new investigations to find out that day.
You guys seem to think that our inability to find out what happened that day is a reason we should accept the inadequate explanations we've been given. That's a very lazy and cynical philosophy.
You still haven't answered any of my questions.
And no, it is still not specific enough.
You also don't dare to draw any conclusions based on that so called specific information you claim to have.
What questions exactly have I not answered, and what exactly was not specific enough?
I can draw conclusions. I don't see any reason to when the pragmatic result of the exercise is to recognize that we need new investigations.
Our inability to determine what happened that day is why we need new investigations to find out that day.
OUR inability?
Since when are we on the same pace?
Anyway, again you admit that you still cannot determine what happened that day
So how specific was that information?
Not specific enough for you to know what was going on.
It seems you guys have nothing to contribute about 9/11. You just like to fantasize about my sex life and my underwear.
Brian, you've spent over six years babbling about magic thermite elves and invisible widows with "questions" here. There's nothing to discuss about 9/11. We'd much rather humiliate you over the fact that you wear women's underwear. It's fun!
Willie's hero story is blatantly fraudulent. Der Spiegel said it was a con--and libel laws in Europe are much stricter than they are here. Pablo Ortiz's story was true--it was verified by some of the dozens of people he saved. Willie's story was a lie. I'm sorry that's too complicated for you to understand, but that's jnot my fault.
Rodriguez pwn3d Brian, and he's still squealing and crying about it.
Ian, it seems that you don't know that there is a resolution pending in the Senate calling for the release of the redacted pages in the Joint Inquiry.
Yes Brian, you've babbled about this before. And when it doesn't say anything about magic thermite elves, you'll denounce it as fraudulent too.
th, I can give specifics about the information. I don't see why I should waste my time giving it to you. You can go to historycommons.org just as easily as I can.
So in other words, you can't give specifics about the information.
I have proven many times on this blog that Willie's story is fraudulent. It seems you lack the ability to learn.
Brian, please stop babbling about your homosexual lust for Rodriguez. You're embarrassing yourself.
Our inability to determine what happened that day is why we need new investigations to find out that day.
We know what happened that day. Nobody cares if you, a failed janitor who lives with his parents, accepts it.
You guys seem to think that our inability to find out what happened that day is a reason we should accept the inadequate explanations we've been given.
We know what happened that day. Nobody cares if you, an unemployed liar who failed out of San Jose State, accepts it.
th, you can deny, deny, deny until you're blue in the face, but that doesn't change the facts. Names were named, tickets were bought, the plot had been known since 1995--the specifics were there.
Lyin Ianinny, I have never babbled about magic or elves. You babble about them frequently.
The widows are not invisible, and 91% of their 300 questions have not been answered. Your persistent lies about the victims of 9/11 indict you and everyone who tolerates those lies.
Rodriguez didn't pwn anyone. He has never addressed the fact that his hero story is impossible, the fact that is not verified by any reliable witness, or the fact that he has tolerated so many versions of John Schroeder's shifting and unverified stories that it's clear he has no interest in truth.
I can give specifics about the information. If I did you would bury it in fantasies about my underwear and my sex life.
Your belief that you know what happened that day is based on a crippled epistemology. You should stick to fashion tips, which seems to be what you enjoy most.
@Brian:
You still failed to answer any of the questions i asked.
I ever spoke about your underwear, so that is a lame excuse for not posting the specifics you claimed you have.
Which means that there can only be one conclusion: you don't have the specifics that you claimed to have.
The widows are not invisible, and 91% of their 300 questions have not been answered. Your persistent lies about the victims of 9/11 indict you and everyone who tolerates those lies.
Nobody cares about your "widows".
Rodriguez didn't pwn anyone.
False.
I can give specifics about the information. If I did you would bury it in fantasies about my underwear and my sex life.
Like I said, you can't give specifics.
Your belief that you know what happened that day is based on a crippled epistemology. You should stick to fashion tips, which seems to be what you enjoy most.
Squeal squeal squeal!
Brian, I can humiliate you both about your hideous haircut, and the fact that you don't know anything about 9/11. The two are not mutually exclusive.
th, your conclusions are as fatuous as your assumptions.
Ianinny, your lyin iananity is strictly NWOR.
Brian, still no answer to my questions.
Why are you too scared to answer them?
th, I didn't see any questions. I'm sure that if you have any they're as fatuous as your assumptions and your conclusions.
So you did not see my questions, but do have an opinion about them :o)
Typical troofer behavior.
Anyway, considering that the information was very specific, what is your conclusoin about how 911 was planned and executed and who was behind it?
th, I didn't see any questions. I'm sure that if you have any they're as fatuous as your assumptions and your conclusions.
Brian, nobody has ever seen any questions from the widows. I'm sure that if they have any, they're as ridiculous as the widows are (i.e., a bunch of gold-digging floozies trying to become rich and famous off of their husbands deaths).
GMS, what you regard as "an investigation" failed to answer 91% of the 9/11 widows' questions and claims it did not analyze the collapses of the twin towers. I don't see how any honest person could claim that such investigations were adequate.
So? That doesn't make your fantasies real. Get back to your no claimer tap dancing.
Theorize and hypothesize may be synonyms to some people, but to people with sufficient education to know the differences between theories and hypotheses they are not synonyms.
No Brian, anyone familiar with the words and how to verify their meaning knows they are.
"nobody has ever seen any questions from the widows. I'm sure that if they have any, they're as ridiculous as the widows are (i.e., a bunch of gold-digging floozies trying to become rich and famous off of their husbands deaths)."
Here are a list of unanswered questions from the 9/11 Family Steering Committee, not just "the widows" (Jersey Girls).
http://www.911independentcommission.org/questions.html
Some have been addressed over the years.
The final statement from the 9/11 Family Steering Committee (which was made up of 12 9/11 Family Members) states "The report did not answer all of our questions, but its in-depth analysis of intelligence, foreign policy, security and other failures and subsequent recommendations for improvement were reforms we could endorse."
Then there's this document compiled by 9/11 Family Members Mindy Kleinberg and Lorie Van Auken showing how poorly the 9/11 Commission answered their questions.
http://wewereliedtoabout911.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/fsc_review.pdf
Then there's Kristen Breitweiser's book "Wake Up Call" that calls into question many things.
They're not trying to become rich and famous off of their husband's deaths. That's essentially an accusation from Ann Coulter. It's fucking disgraceful. Don't expect me to participate in a conversation with you. So many lies on this site.
th, unlike y'all I have no need to come to conclusions before we have had a proper investigation. Call me old-fashioned, but I kind of like to avoid speculation and stick to facts. I know that concept is foreign to y'all, but if you think about it you might see the wisdom in it.
Ian, the widows' list of 300 questions has been readily available online at justicefor911.org for years. I have many times referenced it. You refuse to learn. Your discourtesy to widows is noted. What have the victims of 9/11 ever done to you that you should say such nasty things about them? Also noted is your belief that fame is desirable. You must be a very frustrated person.
GMS, what fantasies do you think I have? I kind of like my scientific reports to analyze what they purport to explain. What do my putative fantasies have to do with the fact that NOST makes the (unbelievable) claim that they did not analyze the collapses?
GMS, anyone who bothers to check what a theory is and what a hypothesis is knows that they are very different. It seems I thought you were more intelligent than you are.
Jon, the toleration shown by mainstream America for the shoddy treatment dealt to the widows is a disgrace.
I wish they would renew their leadership. The last I heard from them was when they were promoting Behrooz Sarshar's story about his translation in the spring of 2001 of warnings about upcoming attacks, warnings that resulted in an FBI memo entitled "Kamikaze Pilots".
I wish they would speak out about the pending federal resolution calling for release of the redacted 28 pages of the Joint Inquiry. It makes me very sad to think that every morning they wake up and their husbands are still dead and they seem to be so discouraged that they have sunk into a despairing apathy.
They've written several letters to the NYTimes that has been posted regarding the 28 redacted pages. Monica Gabrielle and Kristen Breitweiser recently wrote an article that talks about torture and the 9/11 Report. They're doing a lot of things.
Thanks, Jon. I'm glad that Ms. Breitweiser is back in action. Maybe you could inform the folks at 911blogger about recent developments. They're news to me.
Brian and Jon, two dateless losers who are trying to play white knight to the damsels in distress that are the "widows". I'm sure it will get you laid, guys. I guess the rest of us can rest assured that Brian and Jon are too stupid/scared to turn into Elliot Rodger and start shooting when their "heroics" go unnoticed by the women they're directed at.
That comment above is from "Ian", BTW.
Anyway, Brian, what makes you think that the widows husbands are actually dead. Did Willie Rodriguez tell you that?
Still no answer to my question.
Why is Brian too afraid to answer them?
http://911truthnews.com/911-truth-has-always-been-non-violent/
I can't state enough how disgusting all of you "debunkers" are to me.
Nobody cares, Jon. Do something worthwhile with your life and maybe someone will give a rat's ass about you.
https://scontent-iad3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfa1/v/t1.0-9/11390081_1584971731753464_4562281382942304060_n.png?oh=52e57938f464b4b906f3cc17fa00f710&oe=56545A09
Bill Bergman pointed this out to me. The Hill receives an average of 50-200 likes per post. This has well over 16k. Sure, some like it because it's about Rand, but I bet a majority like it because it concerns some of the lies about 9/11. Remember these kinds of things when people say that no one cares. I know I try to.
Well John,
At least Chomsky is with us on this and not with you.
And even Brian now admits that the attacks were real and not faked.
But you may still endorse the theories about spray on thermite, mini nukes, energy weapons, drones, hologram planes, missiles, etc. etc.
Absolutely no problem at all. Just go ahead.
And be disgusted if anyone disagrees with the above and takes time and effort to refute it.
Jon, the "debunkers" don't debunk anything. I cal them "peedunkers" instead.
th, I wish you would not try to interpret what I say. You're incompetent to do so. Please restrict yourself to verbatim quotes in the future.
I don't care what you wish or not, Brian.
Face it, you don't dare to answer my questions...
Post a Comment
<< Home