Saturday, March 03, 2007

Cindy Sheehan, 9-11 Denier?



In fairness she does note that she hasn't really studied it, but she's seen Loose Change and read the Griffin New Pearl Harbor nonsense.

Labels: ,

22 Comments:

At 03 March, 2007 11:29, Blogger ConsDemo said...

I had wondered if Sheehan had bought into 9/11 twoof. She gives the "I don't know for sure" argument I've heard from several on the far left. I guess if there is anything for the twoofers in her comments, it was a call for a "true 9/11 commission", which is a standard twoofer demand although it is pretty clear that any commission that didn't automatically validate their crackpot views would be denounced as illegitimate.

 
At 03 March, 2007 12:53, Blogger CHF said...

She talks about the "New Pearl Harbour."

In other words, she's just another bitter leftist with no reading comprehension skills.

 
At 03 March, 2007 14:46, Blogger MarkyX said...

Cindy...Cindy..

Nope, doesn't ring a bell. Who is she again?

 
At 03 March, 2007 16:40, Blogger pomeroo said...

Low-IQ Democrat cheerleader Perry Logan assures the members of JREF that I am not fit to lick Mother Sheehan's boots.

Somehow, a few of us had a feeling he liked her.

 
At 03 March, 2007 18:05, Blogger Alex said...

Aren't her 15 minutes of infamy over yet?

 
At 03 March, 2007 19:02, Anonymous Anonymous said...

9/11 Video Mashups + "UrantiaGate" allowed as Comments at Sueddeutsche
http://www.bloglines.com/blog/ewing2001?id=2912 http://www.911bloglines.com/aggregator/sources/1 http://ewing2001.newsvine.com/_news/2007/03/03/597089-911-video-mashups-urantiagate-allowed-as-comments-at-sueddeutsche

 
At 03 March, 2007 19:32, Blogger The Reverend Schmitt., FCD. said...

I am going to be severely annoyed if this silliness eats up much more of the American antiwar movement.

 
At 03 March, 2007 21:06, Blogger Sword of Truth said...

I am going to be severely annoyed if this silliness eats up much more of the American antiwar movement.

People tend to believe things that speak to thier specific biases and prejudices (see my previous posts on Clinton conspiracy theories). It stands to reason that twoofiness will continue to win over those who already think Bush % Co. are criminals.

It almost makes you think that southpark was right; that the Bush administration started the whole thing. ;-)

 
At 03 March, 2007 21:15, Blogger shawn said...

Low-IQ Democrat cheerleader Perry Logan assures the members of JREF that I am not fit to lick Mother Sheehan's boots.

If Perry Logan thinks Cindy Sheehan is someone to defend, then he's lost a lot of respect from me. I always thought he was quite humorous (though often wrong, Bush certainly isn't the 'World President Ever' TM).

I am going to be severely annoyed if this silliness eats up much more of the American antiwar movement.

She was making a joke of the antiwar movement without buying into 9/11 Truth. She's an antisemite and an ignoramus.

 
At 03 March, 2007 22:27, Blogger Alex said...

The "anti-war movement" is a joke precisely because they endorse people like her.

I also hate the Orwellian nature of the very name of the movement. The "anti-war" or "peace" movement tends to violently oppose any military involvement by NATO nations, while ignoring wars and conflicts engaged in by other factions. There's nothing "anti-war" about that. It's the same as the 9/11 liars calling themselves the "9/11 Truth Movement". You want to meet people who are really anti-war? Talk to soldiers. I don't think there's anyone more anti-war than people who have seen it's horrors firsthand.

 
At 04 March, 2007 01:35, Blogger Der Bruno Stroszek said...

It's what the terrific British left-wing journalist Francis Wheen calls "double-entry bookkeeping". When you have a conversation with someone that goes like this, you know they're double-entry bookkeepers:

"Huh, America was quick to go after Saddam Hussein because he had oil. But they wouldn't intervene in Darfur, would they? They wouldn't liberate Zimbabwe or North Korea!"

"Okay, we'll start a war with all three of those countries tomorrow. You'd be in favour of that, would you?"

"Er... um... er... now, hang on... I, er... can we talk about the Kyoto Protocol instead?"

Sheehan seems to come at the 9/11 question from the perspective of Bush's motivation. So many Deniers do this; they ask questions like "who benefits?" because it sounds loosely more rational than "Bush wanted to implement martial law, so he faked a plane hijacking to make it seem America was under threat. And he shot one of the planes down, but he didn't admit it, despite the fact that this would help him be seen as strong and decisive, because... er... er... Let's talk about WTC7, everyone!"

As I've pointed out many times before, Dylan Avery has unquestionably benefitted from 9/11. Why are there no conspiracy theories suggesting he did it?

 
At 04 March, 2007 10:31, Blogger Pat said...

You know, the funny thing is that the antiwar movement was quite wary of Cindy before she started her little campout at Crawford. Apparently they knew she had the potential to embarrass them. Unfortunately for them, the media found her compelling and so she became an icon.

Pomeroo, I generally like Perry (despite our disagreement on politics), but he has this gigantic blind spot about the Left and 9-11 Denial. He may despise the "Truthers" but he hates the Republicans even more.

Alex, one of the things that amuses me about the antiwar crowd is how eager they are to save the people of Darfur, even as they would consign the people in Iraq to the car bombers.

 
At 04 March, 2007 10:32, Blogger Sword of Truth said...

Cindy Sheehan is an attention whore.

She will fully embrace 9-11 twoof when other, saner options of grabbing headlines have exhausted themselves.

When the brief fame burst from that runs out, she'll probably start taking hostages.

 
At 04 March, 2007 11:20, Blogger srice555 said...

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=49f_1172526096

http://prisonplanet.com/images/march2007/010307censored.jpg


BBC said WTC7 collapsed 20 minutes before it did!!!!!!!!!!

 
At 04 March, 2007 12:07, Blogger Alex said...

Alex, one of the things that amuses me about the antiwar crowd is how eager they are to save the people of Darfur, even as they would consign the people in Iraq to the car bombers.

Yeah, for the most part they're ignorant youths looking for a "cool" cause. Try talking to them about the fighting going on in Somalia, and they'll look at you like you're from the moon. Or ask them about the apartheid and massacres in Eritrea. While there are a few exceptions, the vast majority of the "peace movement" is composed of bumper-sticker-thinkers who have absolutely no clue about most world events. All they care about is having something to protest against.

 
At 04 March, 2007 12:08, Blogger Sword of Truth said...

Welcome newcomer. We've already discussed this. Here is a short review:

WTC7 was struck by thousands of tons of falling debris.

Fires ignited wich consumed the entire building.

Firefighters determined from the massive structural damage, huge fires on every floor, unnatural bulges, the building leaning at an unsafe angle and the loud groans of straining girders coming from inside the building that it was about to collapse.

The BBC and CNN picked up on this but mistakenly used the wrong verb tense in their live reports.

Any questions?

 
At 04 March, 2007 14:25, Blogger Alex said...

duhhh....what's a verb tense?

 
At 04 March, 2007 19:30, Blogger srice555 said...

The BBC and CNN picked up on this but mistakenly used the wrong verb tense in their live reports.

LOL!! Everything is easier when you wash it always as a mistake!

 
At 04 March, 2007 20:13, Blogger Sword of Truth said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

 
At 05 March, 2007 00:13, Blogger Der Bruno Stroszek said...

Let's break this down, srice. Which of these scenarios do you think is more plausible?

a) The New World Order, in their bid to destroy important documents by pulling down an entire building in a couple of hourse (they haven't invested in a paper shredder yet, poor dears) decided to send a press release saying they'd done it to all major news outlets ahead of the structure's eventual demolition, thereby risking discovery and adding another swathe of people to the ever-expanding list of people who were in on the job, or;

b) The BBC made a mistake.

 
At 07 March, 2007 21:36, Blogger Chad said...

Cindy Sheehan buying into the conspiracy crap is about as shocking as Pamela Anderson admitting she had sex once or twice....

 
At 14 March, 2007 10:36, Blogger Matilda said...

9-11 was obviously an inside job. 19 Arabs with box cutters taking direction from a cave in Afghanistan from an invalid on dialysis defeat the most sophisticated air defense system ever known to mankind. Get Real. Cindy Sheehan is not the one who is in denial, my friends. 911proof.com

 

Post a Comment

<< Home