Friday, July 14, 2006

The Keebler Elf Lady: Part III

If you are a real masochist, you can not only look at the Powerpoint of Judy Wood, giving her Keebler Elf presentation, but watch the video of her presenting it, on July 12th. It is full of cringe inducing moments.

After giving her presentation, not merely content to lie about the laws of physics, she decides to move on to lying about finance:

Judy: There’s the put options. A whole lot of stock options, orders of magnitude more, beginning on the 10th of September, the day before. So there is obviously foreknowledge. And those have not been checked into. It came out in the newspaper the following day. And it was worded, well those people haven’t come to claim their money so we can’t get them. You can’t buy stocks without a social security number and identification.

Host: Was this issue covered by the 9/11 commission?

Judy: No, I don’t believe so. I don’t think anything reasonable was covered by it. Actually David Ray Griffin wrote a wonderful book in response to that. The 9/11 Report: Omissions and Distortions.

Uhh, yeah, actually it was:

There also have been claims that al Qaeda financed itself through manipulation of the stock market based on its advance knowledge of the 9/11 attacks. Exhaustive investigations by the Securities and Exchange Commission, FBI, and other agencies have uncovered no evidence that anyone with advance knowledge of the attacks profited through securities transactions.130

The ironic thing is, if she would have actually paid attention to David Ray Griffin's book, a book she refers to as "wonderful" he spends 5 pages talking about the 9/11 Commission investigation into this. He disagrees with their findings of course, but he leaves no doubt they looked into it. Maybe she should read the Cliff Notes?

There are at least 3 other mistakes she makes regarding the put options, it was "not orders of magnitude more", the purchase of the "suspicious" put options did not begin on the 10th, that was the last day. And lastly you could not have stepped forward to claim your options the next day if you wanted to, the market was closed! How many stupid things can you say in one sentence?

26 Comments:

At 14 July, 2006 15:42, Blogger Murdervillage said...

My theory is that Judy Wood never came out of her coma, and I've coined a new word for her condition: comanambulism

 
At 14 July, 2006 16:01, Blogger The Artistic Macrophage said...

To try and be fair...

She does pose some questions, and there is nothing wrong with that, but (a) here comparison of the wtc's to trees is flawed (in many ways) and (b) she is a supposed EXPERT in all this (mechanical engineer, materials engineer), yet the only theory of her own that she presents in her slide show is the "giving the balls a head start" theory. She doesn't go on to show how and why a "controlled Demolition" would produce the "Free Fall" of the tower and the "initial upward movement" of the debris.

If you look at some of the footage, you can actually see debris that goes up, then down, and actually moves to the ground quicker than the building colapsing, so how is the building in complete free fall??

She spues the same old stuff they all spue, but does not back up her own "Theories" with any scientific fact (that I could see anyway).

 
At 14 July, 2006 16:45, Blogger Pat said...

MV, LOL!

All I can think of whenever I hear about Judy Wood is that awful late 1980s song, "Girlfriend in a Coma".

 
At 14 July, 2006 17:38, Blogger Killtown said...

Someone answer this:

Lets pretend all 767/757's crash where we were told.

Of the 1st responders at the Shanksville scene arriving within 30min after the crash, none reported seeing fires or thick black trails of smoke in the air from jet fuel fires.

Smoke trails and fires at the WTC and Penatagon lasted waaaaay beyond a half hour.

Why no long lasting smoke and fires at the Shankville crash site as with the WTC and Pentagon plane crashes?

Did Flight 93 Crash in Shanksville?

 
At 14 July, 2006 17:43, Blogger default.xbe said...

once the fuel burned off int eh pentagon and wtc there was still lots of paper burning

since 93 didnt crash into an office building the amount of combustibles was much lower (bear in mind living wood wouldnt catch fire as fast and might not ignite before all the fuel burns off)

 
At 14 July, 2006 17:46, Blogger James B. said...

Of the 1st responders at the Shanksville scene arriving within 30min after the crash, none reported seeing fires or thick black trails of smoke in the air from jet fuel fires.


If you believe the first responders who say this, then why don't you believe those very same first responders who saw the pieces of the plane and held body parts in their hands?

 
At 14 July, 2006 17:56, Blogger The Artistic Macrophage said...

because CTs like to "cherry pick" their evidence to put the peices of their obtuse puzzle together.

 
At 14 July, 2006 17:59, Blogger shawn said...

Lets pretend all 767/757's crash where we were told.

Next you'll tell us to pretend the Earth revolves around the sun.

 
At 14 July, 2006 18:26, Blogger The Artistic Macrophage said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

 
At 14 July, 2006 19:05, Blogger The Artistic Macrophage said...

Here is a problem I have with the Pentagon CTs:

1. Main theory that most Cts belief = A missile, not a plane or airliner, was used to hit the Pentagon.

2. Scholars 9/11 on National media quote Mineta as being proof of their theories on 9/11. Meanwhile, his direct testimony to the commission (which they whine about it being left out of the final report) contradicts their main arguement...here is the testimony quote:

Mineta: "During the time that the airplane was coming into the Pentagon, there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice President...the plane is 50 miles out...the plane is 30 miles out....and when it got down to the plane is 10 miles out, the young man also said to the vice president "do the orders still stand?" And the Vice President turned and whipped his neck around and said "Of course the orders still stand, have you heard anything to the contrary!??"

So if it was a missile, sent to pentagon via Cheney et al, then why are they even discussing a plane coming towards Pentagon, and why would Cheney respond in such a way?

 
At 14 July, 2006 19:13, Blogger apathoid said...

So if it was a missile, sent to pentagon via Cheney et al, then why are they even discussing a plane coming towards Pentagon, and why would Cheney respond in such a way?

This is a really great point. CTers just seem to latch onto anything they can get ahold of, even if it might disqualify the current theory. I've pointed this out before to NesNYC as he (a no-planer) was up in arms over the Minets testimony. Of course, when I questioned him as to why a no-planer would even care, he was notably absent for the rest of the discussion......

 
At 14 July, 2006 19:54, Blogger The Artistic Macrophage said...

That is why it is important for those of us who believe in the evidence, in proof, to organize all of the claims, both official, and alternative, and present the evidence for each. So far I have seen alot of great videos and texts to debunk a particular movie, or arguements back and for about particular pieces of evidence. Is anyone organizing a document from the scientifc, rationalist pov detailing all of the evidence, for all sides, and perhaps agreeing upon a grading system for various evidences, opions, claims. I started to do this, but the topics and claims are so overwhelming in sheer number and the amount of data on them, that I spent two days on it, and only covered 2 aspects of one theory.

911myths.com comes closest to what I would ultimately like to see in this regard.

The grading system I used for evidence was to give the highest grade to that evidence which was produced by multiple, trusted (by most of the public) sources. Also to give this level of evidence to opinions from experts (defined as PhDs in the particular field, or equivalent experts where PhD was not an option). These opinions had to be supported by multiple experts in the same or closely related fields. I also gave the highest grade for evidence that consisted of multple unrecanted eyewitness testimony, with at least 5 corroborating witnessed accounts (also unrecanted). The evidence gradings would decline from there.

I would like to see a group of like minded individuals come up with an agreed upon grading system for evidence, that can be used universally for all the evidence, and then just start grading it.

Of course, the flaw for us, is that the CTs will immediately call it "a farce" because what we consider reliable sources (CNN,NY Times, Boston Globe) are all in on the plot...oh well.

 
At 14 July, 2006 20:13, Blogger Killtown said...

default.xbe said...since 93 didnt crash into an office building the amount of combustibles was much lower (bear in mind living wood wouldnt catch fire as fast and might not ignite before all the fuel burns off)

not even the grass under the trees that wasn't burnt or all the dry hemlock around the crater?

 
At 14 July, 2006 20:14, Blogger Killtown said...

James B. said...If you believe the first responders who say this, then why don't you believe those very same first responders who saw the pieces of the plane and held body parts in their hands?

Why would I deny they saw planted debris?

 
At 14 July, 2006 20:24, Blogger Killtown said...

The Artistic Macrophage said...So if it was a missile, sent to pentagon via Cheney et al, then why are they even discussing a plane coming towards Pentagon, and why would Cheney respond in such a way?

This might help:

Mineta: "During the time that the "airplane" was coming into the Pentagon, there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice President...the "plane" is 50 miles out...the "plane" is 30 miles out....and when it got down to the "plane" is 10 miles out, the young man also said to the vice president "do the orders still stand?" And the Vice President turned and whipped his neck around and said "Of course the orders still stand, have you heard anything to the contrary!??"

Does that help?

 
At 14 July, 2006 20:37, Blogger apathoid said...

Why would I deny they saw planted debris?

What about...
Planted body parts?
Of the passengers?
The passengers that took off from Boston an hour earlier???

How did small scraps of aluminum get on Indian Lake, 2 miles away?

How did some(really light) debris get planted 8 miles away?

Why would they plant debris so far away...

I'm sorry Killtown, but you have to have a least one person saying they saw evidence being planted at any one of the four crash sites to even consider it a possibility...
Do you have any such witnesses?

there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice President...the "plane" is 50 miles out...the "plane" is 30 miles out....and when it got down to the "plane" is 10 miles out

Bang up research KT, now tell me why they would be doing this if they were responsible for shooting the missile?
Was he asking if the order still stood to shoot down/not shoot their own missile?
Help me out buddy.

 
At 14 July, 2006 20:38, Blogger James B. said...

Why would I deny they saw planted debris?


So someone chopped up the body parts of the victims and then ran through the field throwing the pieces around? That is a pretty sick theory.

 
At 14 July, 2006 21:03, Blogger dman said...

Geez Killtown you almost sound like
you know what you are talking about

As someone who actually saw a jet
crash in my neighborhood can say
you are full of SHIT!. Number of
years ago Lear crashed about 300
yards down the street. As member
of fire department responded to
scene. When a plane crashes at
high speed fuel tanks are ruptured
and fuel load sprays out in mist
which ignites in fireball - looks
real impressive but burns out
quickly. We were able to knock
down spot fires with only onboard
water tank (500 gal). Since Flight
93 crashed in Early Sept - woods
and vegetation still green and
difficult to ignite. As for debris
modern jet are like aluminium
balloons which shred in metallic
"confetti" on impact. Only few
large pieces of heavy construction
survive intact - only recognizable
pieces on our site were landing
gear light (which hit parked car)
and 2 x 3 section of rudder. From
pictures of Shanksville can say
looks very similar to our crash
Small crater surrounded by debris
and human remains - one thing is
that the occupants of plane are
shredded into "human hamburger"
(not to be gross but descriptive)
On our crash only "human looking"
pieces which were not burnt in fire
were piece of hand, some amputated
fingers and section of torso. No
blood or gore.

 
At 14 July, 2006 21:41, Blogger Murdervillage said...

Killtown, you're such a busy researcher! Silly goose, you completely forgot about the video you posted earlier this month! Remember the interview with the C-130 pilot who saw the crash of flight 77 and the aftermath of flight 93? Remember seeing the smoking crater and woods near Shanksville on the video? You know what you need? A secretary! I volunteer!

p.s. Don't be shy about telling us what the people you interviewed said! I've asked, like, 20 times!

 
At 14 July, 2006 21:53, Blogger Murdervillage said...

Apathoid, you need to start thinking outside the Apathiod Box and inside the Woody Box!

Of course they kept reporting to Cheney that the plane was getting closer and closer to D.C. That was the plane that fired the missile! They had to get really close to be sure of a hit, hence the broken light poles, then ZOOM, they pulled away and escaped while everyone was in shock and awe over the explosion! Watch the video Killtown posted. The pilot doesn't exactly say the he saw the plane hit the Pentagon, does he?

And you call yourselves critical thinkers! Critical stinkers is more like it!

 
At 14 July, 2006 21:59, Blogger Murdervillage said...

Oh, I forgot! The plane that fired the missile at the Pentagon also released he remains of the passengers at that moment. They had been killed and chopped up en route. Also some old AA aircraft debris was stowed in the cargo compartment and released then.

Occam's razor, "skeptics", Occam's razor.

 
At 14 July, 2006 23:24, Blogger roger_sq said...

have uncovered no evidence that anyone with advance knowledge of the attacks profited through securities transactions.130

So... who is Ed G.?

I like when you source things to people named "Ed G.". Especially when they are the only official historical record available.

 
At 15 July, 2006 08:25, Blogger CHF said...

Just to recap some of the brilliant points we’ve seen on SLC over the past few months from either our resident CTers or the rest of the "truth" movement...

- The Holocaust was a hoax
- The Cold War didn’t happen
- Muslim suicide bombers (Palestine, Iraq, Russia, Egypt, India, Bali etc.) are all Jewish hoaxes
- Abu Nidal (the founder of Fatah) was an Israeli mercenary
- The WTC was constructed with explosives built into the concrete way back in the 1970s
- You can rig up three skyscrapers with CD charges without anyone noticing
- The WTC towers fell at free fall speed
- no wait, the WTC towers fell FASTER than free fall speed
- The WTC is comparable to a tree
- Every single floor of the WTC was rigged with bombs
- Controlled demolitions don’t made hundreds of really loud bangs
- People jump out of buildings because they’re "scared," not because they have no choice
- Airphone calls were impossible on 9/11 because "you need a credit card for that"
- Only about 50 people were involved in the 9/11 conspiracy
- If someone analyzes an event by starting off with a completely flawed premise then that in no way means their findings are not valid
- An academic can speak authoritatively on anything at all since they’re all "smart"
- Witnesses are reliable when they hear "explosions" at the WTC but they’re unreliable when they see a plane at the Pentagon
- Conspiracy theorists know more about controlled demos and building collapses than CD experts and structural engineers
- Every structural engineer on the planet is a coward
- Flight 93 landed and the "crash" site was buldozed and pieces of aircraft and bodies were sprinkled around

We’re not dealing with different opinions here – these are symptoms of a full-fledged mental disorder.

 
At 15 July, 2006 08:47, Blogger Manny said...

So... who is Ed G.?

I like when you source things to people named "Ed G.". Especially when they are the only official historical record available.


It would please you no end to publish the full names of the intelligence officers who contributed to the investigation, wouldn't it?

Too bad.

 
At 15 July, 2006 08:52, Blogger The Artistic Macrophage said...

I was just looking through the Moussaoui trial evidence, and holy cow there is a lot, inclduing a ton of Photos, some of the pentagon that show a huge part of it knocked out, and much more...

http://www.rcfp.org/moussaoui/

 
At 15 July, 2006 08:59, Blogger James B. said...

I thought there was no investigation at all? You aren't accussing a "scholar" for 9/11 "truth" of lying to us, are you?

 

Post a Comment

<< Home