See other 9/11 Articles
Title: The Best Rebuttal To The Truthers
Source:
rhymeswithright
URL Source: http://rhymeswithright.mu.nu/archives/229396.php
Published: Jun 15, 2007
Author: rhymeswithright
Post Date: 2007-06-15 09:11:39 by can of corn
Keywords: twoofers, tinfoil, ron paul
Views: 840
Comments: 92
You know, those loons that cannot believe that 9/11 was a terrorist attack and that instead our own government attacked America on 9/11. No, it isn't an appeal to eyewitnesses, of whom there are many. It isn't an appeal to science, which overwhelmingly demonstrates that the official version is correct. Rather, it is a simple appeal to logic. [T]o believe in many of these kooky conspiracy theories, you have to believe that tens of thousands, maybe even hundreds of thousands of Republicans, Democrats, Independents, politicians, bureaucrats, journalists, FBI agents, and CIA agents all know about an incredibly complex, monstrous plot against the United States, and are keeping their lips sealed while Charlie Sheen, Rosie O'Donnell, and the fruit loops who think Bush is a puppet of the Freemasons have figured it all out. So much like the claim that the moon landings all took place in a soundstage, simple reality cannot sustain the conspiracy claims. After all, given the inability of small groups of people to keep small secrets, there is no way that a large group of people could possibly keep "the truth" hidden if 9/11 was a government conspiracy.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: can of corn (#0)
It doesn't take that many. How many knew about the Reichstag Fire?
"Guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism." ~George Washington
You call this the "Best reply"?Is this the "Best" that you can do,your a joke.
irony, irony
Your willful ignorance is breathtaking.
Check out my blog, America, the Bushieful.
No human could be born that stupid so my guess is he gets paid to be stupid.
Hey, take a look at my favorite anti-twoofer rant
As David Ray Griffin points out, the secret of the Manhattan Project was kept for several years, even though many thousands of people must have known about it to some extent. One might add that the secret of our having cracked the Enigma German cypher machine was kept for 30 years or so, even though, again, many thousands of people were briefed enough about the project to know that much.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
"That all said, Truthers need to get shot in the back of the fucking head. Every last one of them. Line 'em up against the wall like the St. Valentine's Day Massacre. Fucking lame-dick conspiracy theorist tinfoil-hat fucktards, every fucking last douchebag piss-gargling one of them." Willful ignorance plus hate-filled malace is a bad combination. I see that you are a big fan of mass murder. I guess that's why you hate us Truthers. Were you a participant in the 9-11 op? You seem like just the type.
Check out my blog, America, the Bushieful.
The Bush Administration couldn't even keep his wiretapping programs from being leaked. It's idiocy to suggest he could pull off a job like this without somebody leaking it. And BTW, since hijackers didn't really fly planes with passengers into the WTCs, where are those planes and passengers and crew now? I'd love to here how Bush was supposed to have all these whisked away secretly without anyone noticing. You think Babara Olsen is now living on some secluded Pacific island?
Tell them to reveiw the Kennedy assination - people are leaking suff on that right now. Remind them that in 60 to 90 years all the 911 stuff will come out the same way if there is now a cover up.
Oh, you mean like the Kennedy assassination conspiracy, which E. Howard Hunt admitted on his death bed? The government's official line is far weirder than some of the conspiracy theories, IMHO.
The "Department of Defense" has never won a war. The "War Department" was undefeated.
I remember my well-read sister excitedly telling me about this in the 70s. It changed the course of the war, but as you say, a well guarded secret for decades.
"Guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism." ~George Washington
You really do love those straw men, don't you? I haven't committed myself to any particular theory of what happened on 9/11, merely to the conclusion that the official account of 9/11 is itself so absurd as to be unbelievable. Plenty of alternatives leave the planes hitting the buildings and the hijackers on board the planes.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
Nor do any of the twoofers, because they can't fathom a plausible real life scenario that correlates with their conspiracy fantasies. It's impossible to know EXACTLY what happened during the building collpases. And people can hear things which SOUND like explosions. And witnesses always have conflicting accounts. And some people will say controversial things just for publicity. Etc. Etc. The twoofers dwell on such minitia as proof of some kind of conspiracy, but in reality, the conspiracy only exists in their brain addled imaginations.
That our air defense system failed to perform as it always had you think is a piece of minutiae?
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
You need to formulate your arguments without letting your vile, irrational hatred seep through in the form of childish name calling.
.
Who in God's name would click a link posted by a troll such as yourself?
.
I suggest you read David Ray Griffin's Debunking 9/11 Debunking. I believe he refutes the arguments that appear to be at your link.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
No, the link I gave you addresses the rebuttals as well as refuting the original claim.
Then why don't you post them here and go through them? Is it easier to post a suspicious link to a mass of crap and then say: "If you were to wade through that mess you would see I am right." ?
.
Those who want to stick their fingers in their ears and go "NAH NAH NAH, I can't hear you, Bush and the Joos did it," and not want to know the truth?
Your loss of control and childish name calling are noted. I think it says something about the strength of your argument. By the way, I just answered your post in Post #21 above.
.
Because, there are many links within the link I gave adressing all the points, and the arguments are long and detailed, and it's not practical to post them here. I'm sorry that no Alex Jones' type 30 second sound bite is available. I'm aware that that is what the twoofers normally consider "proof."
You won't read Griffin's book, but you expect me to read the stuff at your link?
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
And you cannot give us a synopsis that we can check against the sources in the link and rip to shreds. OK, that really does explain where you are coming from. I suspected this and that is why I made Post #21.
.
This is a small study in how truly wrong-headed the Ziocon apologists really are. By their own logic, the opposition to "the Truthers" (the opposition being the Ziocons themselves) would be called: "the Liars".
You need to keep obvious hate, anger and silly name calling out of your posts. It makes you sound like an AM radio GOP shill.
.
Well, he's young and it's spring.....
OK, here is where we are now. You have posted a pile of disorganized crap at a suspicious link and you tell us that if we would only wade through it then you would be proven correct. When the nonsense of this position is pointed out to you, you begin screaming and hurling cheap insults like a nine year old. What is next?
.
Here is a list of points addressed: # Payne Stewart and the story of the “speedy” interception # "It takes about one minute" for the FAA to contact NORAD about a problem plane, after which NORAD can scramble fighter jets “within a matter of minutes” to anywhere in the United States # Fighter intercepts are routine, with 67 taking place in 9 months before 9/11 # A June 1st 2001 change in intercept procedures required all requests for assistance in hijackings to be approved by the Secretary of Defence # Dick Cheney was in charge of NORAD hijacking exercises on 9/11 # Eye-witness testimony casts doubt on the time NORAD claimed they scrambled jets to intercept Flight 11 # Intercepts of suspect planes normally happen within 10 minutes. Why not on 9/11? # The hijacked planes should still have been tracked on radar, even if their transponders were turned off # The many war games and exercises scheduled for 9/11 delayed military response to the hijackings # Why were fighters not launched from Andrews Air Force Base, closest to Washington? # When fighters were launched, they flew at suspiciously slow speeds # General Myers initial story was that no fighters were launched until after the Pentagon was hit # The 9/11 Commission say that NORAD didn’t recognise the threat from 9/11-type attacks until they happened, but that just isn’t credible ***************************** It addresses the implausibility of conspiracy claims for each point as well as the rebuttals made to the debunking of the conspiracy claims. It should be quite clear that no brief synopsis is available other than the twoofers are full of caca.
CORRECT. Of course the war game exercises were just a coinkeydink. http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/911stand.html http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/usaf_911.html War Games: The Key to a Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction CJCSI 3610.01A (dated 1 June 2001) changed the protocol so that any requests for "potentially lethal support" had to come explicitly from the secretary of defense, leaving commanders in the field unable to respond to hijackings in any meaningful fashion. Five military exercises were held on 9/11, and this resulted in flight controllers, commanders and pilots being unable to distinguish real world events from exercise scenarios. Even if a hostile plane was identified it couldn't be fired upon because secretary of defense Donald Rumsfeld was "out of the loop" during the attacks (as was the acting head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff). Chaos reigned supreme on 9/11 thanks to the above... ...and this effectively stood down the USAF when it was needed most. 9/11 Commission Testimony "Guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism." ~George Washington
Quit spamming. I don't care what particular points are addressed and you know that. You are trying to obfuscate the fact that your silly tactic was exposed. Use the information to refute the allegations that people have made on this thread. Then source your assertion. But you understand all of this.
.
This was addressed in the link I gave: ************************************** The story... It is routine policy and practice for fighter jets to intercept planes if they go off course even by 2 miles. In the year prior to 9/11 there were 67 such intercepts. It's therefore inconceivable that none of the hijacked planes would be intercepted on 9/11. Our take... Popular Mechanics claimed that intercepts were not routine at all: In the decade before 9/11, NORAD intercepted only one civilian plane over North America: golfer Payne Stewart's Learjet, in October 1999. With passengers and crew unconscious from cabin decompression, the plane lost radio contact but remained in transponder contact until it crashed. Even so, it took an F-16 1 hour and 22 minutes to reach the stricken jet. Rules in effect back then, and on 9/11, prohibited supersonic flight on intercepts. Prior to 9/11, all other NORAD interceptions were limited to offshore Air Defense Identification Zones (ADIZ). "Until 9/11 there was no domestic ADIZ," FAA spokesman Bill Schumann tells PM. After 9/11, NORAD and the FAA increased cooperation, setting up hotlines between ATCs and NORAD command centers, according to officials from both agencies. NORAD has also increased its fighter coverage and has installed radar to monitor airspace over the continent. http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?page=3&c=y This issue attracted many comments from other sites, attempting to themselves debunk the Popular Mechanics piece. 911 Research, for instance, referred to this quote by Norad official Major Douglas Martin, who in an AP story said: "From Sept. 11 to June, NORAD scrambled jets or diverted combat air patrols 462 times, almost seven times as often as the 67 scrambles from September 2000 to June 2001, Martin said". www.wanttoknow.info/020812ap And from this 911Research conclude: It is safe to assume that a significant fraction of scrambles lead to intercepts, so the fact that there were 67 scrambles in a 9-month period before 9/11/01 suggests that there are dozens of intercepts per year. To its assertion that there was only one intercept in a decade, the article adds that "rules in effect ... prohibited supersonic flight on intercepts," and the suggestion that there were no hotlines between ATCs and NORAD. http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pm/ This seems reasonable, until you look more closely, because the primary assertion they are objecting to here is that “there was only one intercept in a decade”. And that’s not what the original piece said: let’s look at the key points again. In the decade before 9/11, NORAD intercepted only one civilian plane over North America: golfer Payne Stewart's Learjet Prior to 9/11, all other NORAD interceptions were limited to offshore Air Defense Identification Zones (ADIZ). "Until 9/11 there was no domestic ADIZ,"... So what Popular Mechanics are saying is that there was one intercept of a “civilian plane over North America” in the decade before 9/11, because all other intercepts were offshore. There’s no direct contradiction with the Douglas Martin quote, as he doesn’t say whether the intercepts were offshore or over the continental US. It’s not just Popular Mechanics saying this, either. The October 2005 edition of “Plane & Pilot” magazine essentially did the same: Terms like Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) and temporary flight restriction (TFR) quickly came into widespread use among the general-aviation pilot group. Those terms had been around for years. Military fighters and the ADIZ protected American coasts from intrusions by Russian Bear Bombers throughout the Cold War. TFRs were used for presidential security and other extraordinary events. But they weren’t part of a pilot’s everyday life. You didn’t get intercepted and forced down if you flew through a TFR. Today, things are different. There’s an ADIZ that surrounds Washington, D.C. In the four years after 9/11, it was violated over 1,000 times. The North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) has scrambled fighters for intercepts within U.S. borders over 1,600 times. In the year previous to 9/11, NORAD intercepted airplanes in the ADIZ only 67 times, none of which occurred within the U.S. borders. http://www.planeandpilotmag.com/content/2005/oct/busting_tfr.html The Popular Mechanics claim still seems quite absolute, but then that just means it wouldn’t take much to disprove it. Just find a media report of an intercept, an interview with a pilot who was intercepted when they accidentally flew too close to the White House, anything like that... How difficult can it be? After all, if these 67 scrambles in 9 months were typical, and we’re equating scrambles with intercepts, then that suggests 893 of these events over 10 years. Even if only 10% were intercepts over the continental US, then surely there must be an unquestionable, rock-solid record of one of them, somewhere? Well, uh, no, it seems not. At least not from the various Popular Mechanics debunking pieces. Alex Jones, for instance, tells us this: I've talked to pilots who've had radio problems and F-16's fly up next to them. Everybody knows this, not just Maj. Douglas Martin the Public Affairs Officer. ...We have the public record, everybody knows this, this is public knowledge. http://www.prisonplanet.tv/audio/090305alexresponds.htm No names, no references, nothing you can check, you just have to take his word for it. Peter Meyer uses the Douglas Martin quote, then quotes an email as supporting evidence: ...Here is the "Key" to unlock the door: The extensive flight logs for 20 years from the 3 military bases in the area and Port Authority responding to air threats is exemplary. Thousands of sorties run in response to threats, practice runs, false alarms, done weekly or daily over 20 years.... http://www.serendipity.li/wot/pop_mech/reply_to_popular_mechanics.htm This is a little better as the person making the quote is named, but again, you’re still basically just taking their word for it. (There’s a little more to the email and their argument, but we don’t want to reproduce the entire page here, so zip over to the above site and check it out for yourself. We’ll wait.) On balance, then, the “intercepts are routine” claim is far from proven, at least in conjunction with intercepts over the continental US. And if there really were so many, then it seems a little odd there’s not more concrete, solid documentation to show it. What’s more, even if we ignore Popular Mechanics and just consider the Douglas Martin quote, it’s far from clear as to what this actually means. Note that he was talking about the number of times jets were scrambled (and possibly diverted). Could some planes have been recalled soon afterwards, perhaps because radio contact had been re-established? Absolutely, scrambling is only the first step. We don't know how many actual intercepts actually took place. Another complication is that in the first figure Martin refers to scrambling jets or diverting combat air patrols, while in the second he mentions scrambling only. Is the quote literally correct, or does the “67” figure also include combat patrols that were diverted to a particular target? Regardless of that, it’s worth bearing in mind that intercepts may not always be successful. ...another federal official said that two years ago [in 2002], military jets could identify and intercept only about 40 percent of intruders in training drills. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A35440-2004Jul7_2.html Some claim intercepts always happened if planes travelled into restricted or prohibited areas, but this isn’t true at all. An FAA rule change from September 28th 2001 makes this clear. WASHINGTON - The FAA today alerted civilian pilots of their responsibility to avoid restricted airspace and the procedures to follow if intercepted, in light of the Department of Defense announcement that pilots near or in restricted or prohibited airspace face a forced landing, or as a last resort, use of deadly force by military aircraft... Earlier, pilots who flew in restricted or prohibited areas received a warning from Air Traffic Control and then faced suspension or revocation of their licenses or a fine. Now a pilot faces interception by military aircraft and then a forced landing at the first available airport. The Department of Defense has stated that deadly force will be used only as a last resort after all other means are exhausted. http://www.faa.gov/apa/pr/pr.cfm?id=1415 So prior to 9/11 it seems that even flying in restricted or prohibited airspace wouldn’t necessarily result in an interception. This impression appears to be confirmed by a 1998 story of an American Airlines jet flying directly over the White House, which fails to mention NORAD, fighters or intercepts: An American Airlines jetliner flew directly over the White House two months ago, through some of the country's most sensitive restricted airspace, apparently because of a mix-up at Reagan National Airport's radar control facility. The July 16 incident presented no danger to President Clinton or anyone else on the ground or in the air, and the aircraft was flying high enough that likely no one even noticed, other than air traffic controllers, the pilots and the Secret Service. But it was one of a rapidly increasing number of White House airspace violations, which have more than doubled each year since fiscal 1996, despite precautions taken after a small plane struck the White House in 1994. The trend has concerned the Secret Service and the Federal Aviation Administration, leading to new warnings to pilots and a recommendation by a task force to update maps and make other changes at National. The American Airlines incident alone apparently has prompted the FAA to consider changes in procedures for one National landing pattern.
I'm doing nothing more than demonstrating you have no desire to know the truth and wish to wallow in your paranoid delusional fantasies.
OK, this proves you are a knowing, bald faced liar. Please post my views on the 911 truth movement, i.e., my paranoid delusional fantasies on the subject, and provide a link to back up your claim. You can't do it and you know it. What you state above is a knowing bald faced lie performed with the specific intent to smear. By the way, if you can't control your temper, it is probably time to turn off the 'puter.
.
That looks an awful lot like a BAC posting. BAC was also really sensitive about 9/11, for some reason.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
That's not the same as an official STAND DOWN.
"Guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism." ~George Washington
He already used the "anti-semitic website" canard, and not on any particular site. I posted a link to a search page with several results that backed up my position. I think we know what kind of an asshole we are dealing with here. The difference is coc will always hide behind lies and the keyboard. I am a street brawler from way back and would not hesitate to kick his ass in a one on one. It would never happen. He is a pussy and will keep hiding.
"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
aristeides is right. you are imitating BAC again. you were warned about this yesterday. if you can't be original i WILL replace you with a new kook. this is your last warning.
why don't understand why he changes his name every few days over on LP.
They all have the same Mossad/ADL/DOD/CIA issued "copy and paste" "rebuttals" on their hard drives.
You mean sourced point by point rebuttals of truther claims? What was the problem?
By the way, if you can't control your temper, it is probably time to turn off the 'puter. . No I haven't seen much of what you've posted. BTW, does anybody buy your phony indignation act?
Also just the same format BAC used. It's very noticeable.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
Meaning you had absolutely no justification for your accusation of paranoia.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
I always used to wonder how BAC was able to produce those enormous tomes within seconds.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
When he makes summary remarks like this towards links rebutting the twoofers: And you cannot give us a synopsis that we can check against the sources in the link and rip to shreds. I have to assume he agrees with the twoofers since he automatically assumes anything rebutting them will ripped to shreds.
Oh BTW, I have seen portions of Griffin's writings. In one instance, he surmises that Cheney ordered the plane to be allowed to hit the Pentagon. Then, in another he surmises that a plane didn't hit it at all. It was a missile. Like all the twoofers, he can't even get his story straight.
Griffin has now written four books on 9/11. It's only natural that he should have altered his thinking over time. Does this alleged contradiction exist in his latest book, Debunking 9/11 Debunking? Don't you think it's fair to press him on his views in his latest book? Maybe you should read it, instead of refusing to read it?
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
Judging from the reviews of Griffin's book, this is nothing more than the same threadbare conspiracy rantings being bandied about for the last 5 years. Conspiracy rantings effectively dismissed here or here for two places.
Starred Review. An emeritus professor of theology with no previous interest in conspiracy theories, Griffin has dedicated himself since 2003 to the "9/11 truth" movement, a group committed to "exposing the falsity of the official theory about 9/11," and this book is a thorough, highly detailed attempt to do just that. As Griffin aptly notes, "the assumption that conspiracy theories are inherently irrational" has recently taken root in American culture, making any attack on the official government record instantly dismissible, but Griffin takes to the difficult task with solid reasoning and true zeal. All but the most dogmatic readers will find Griffin's evidence-from the inconsistencies between NORAD tapes and the 9/11 Commission Report to rigorous exploration into the physics of the collapse-detailed and deeply unnerving. For instance, Griffin considers the fact that firefighters were told, five hours before the fact, that building WTC 7 was going to collapse, despite "the fact that WTC 7 was not hit by a plane, that the available photographs show no large fires, and that fire had never caused a steel-frame high-rise to collapse." Another chilling passage looks at the Pennsylvania crash site of United Airlines Flight 93 through the testimony of those first to arrive, who were unanimous in finding "no recognizable plane parts, no body parts." For anyone who doubts the government's truthfulness regarding the WTC terrorist attack, this well-researched volume will give you a trough full of ideas to chew on. The reviews from the page to which you linked are unanimously highly favorable. Including the first one, from Publishers Weekly. I wonder if you bothered to read the reviews.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
Yes, I did to see what his arguments were, and there's nothing new. You will find them rebutted at the links I gave you.
Any commercial passenger jet that suddenly "goes dark" while on or off radar becomes an immediate priority and jets are scrambled to intercept. Any commercial passenger plane that departs from its scheduled flight plan becomes an immediate priority and jets are scrambled to intercept. In every incident when one or both of these anomalies were present (prior to this early Christmas/Channukah present to PNAC, neocons, military contractors, Israel, Larry Silverstein and BushCo) the planes that triggered the alarms were successfully intercepted if they remained airborne, and usually before those that crashed did so. (Payne Stewart) In every case where any circumstances resulted in unanswered questions about the status, air worthiness and/or safety of every airborne commercial and private/corporate plane, fighter jets were dispatched and the airliners and private/corporate planes that remained airborne were successfully intercepted. This is for two reasons. The military jets are so fast and strategically stationed that escape/evasion was (prior to 9/11) virtually impossible, and, all conceivable evasive tactics have been anticipated and remedies solidified into policy. No one has ever asserted that some new and unanticipated method(s) to defeat our air defenses were implemented that terrible day. No, we were told that, not only have official sources failed to agree on what times ATC and Norad were notified, but some in critical positions of responsibility were either mistaken or confused, and, that no crime was committed when one ATC supervisor destroyed an audiotape and spread the broken pieces between several trash receptacles, and none of those trained and charged with US airspace safety have been demoted or discharged and in fact many have been promoted since that terrible day. These intercepts are successfully accomplished about 100 times a year, and without exception. There are simply no legitimate unanticipated contingencies that could have permitted four airliners to have defeated the multi billion dollar redundant air safety and defense systems that terrible day, unless it was allowed to happen. Only persons who are too petrified to contemplate the implications of this, and those who desperately want the official fairie tale to be accepted could assert, or (in the case of the really afflicted dummies, believe) otherwise. And, if the official story was accurate the studies to identify and close these deadly breaches in our air defenses would be ongoing today, as opposed to the fact that no such investigation has ever been demanded by govt or media watchdogs, not even ambitious political hopefuls who seize on every newsworthy issue when campaigning, not even those political hacks representing Israel, which has done all it could for twenty years to make American airlines adopt EL AL-type security measures including hand searching of every bag on every flight, and automatic emergency flare and chaff deployment measures on every passenger airplane (to defeat close range MANPADs and other weapons) and not even consumer groups (surviving family members notwithstanding) who are concerned for the safety of our country have offered any apparently (FOX, CNN or MSNBC) newsworthy concerns about the complete collapse and failure of multiple redundant systems resulting in thousands of death and billions in losses. These facts alone would be enough to indict, convict and execute persons for crimes in any other case, country or circumstances, but within days our govt was asking, "Osama hoo?" and telling us that Saddam was the culprit, a charge which Bush himself has since publicly admitted was untrue. And, we were told that the American people's faith in the Bush regime, the Pentagon, NORAD and all involved persons and agencies was unshakable, except in the minds of obviously distraught (and possibly unpatriotic and Bush hating, which are now synonymous) enclaves of kooks and profiteers who are simply looking for the big payoff, and because Bush talks to GOD any questions about the ever evolving official account is the mark of greedy traitors trying to profit from tragedy and hurt an unimpeachable character who wouldn't lie about anything, or have an agenda other than humble service (as our dictator if we really insist, because no sacrifice is too great and he'd overcome his humility somehow) and to hold back nothing in service to the greatest nation on earth. Not one American statistician or mathematician has dared to reveal the impossible odds of these events coinciding, as was the case with the assassination of JFK when only one Canadian think tank crunched the numbers. Now why is that?
Nice rant!
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition Thank you. If BAC was here he'd post pix of the Pentagon and say, "Lt. Col Karen Kwiatkowski is a liar, and people who live in silica based structures shouldn't launch poorly targeted projectiles...." And, with a link or course.
This is the writing can of corn has just admitted that he admires, in fact it's his favorite "anti-twoofer" rant. So he actually does enjoy applying the 1st amendment, when it suits him. There is obviously no need to be polite to him when he lies and spins, that's not his "favorite" type of rant. That all said, Truthers need to get shot in the back of the fucking head. Every last one of them. Line 'em up against the wall like the St. Valentine's Day Massacre. Fucking lame-dick conspiracy theorist tinfoil-hat fucktards, every fucking last douchebag piss-gargling one of them. IQ of fucking mayonnaise, I swear. I'm so sick of the vacuum-skulled pissant walking piles of drooling slime clod motherfuckers being looked at as if they have a valid fucking opinion, and NOT being thrown into a fucking rubber room where they fucking belong. And if you number amongst these witless shitstains, let me know right here and now so that I can never fucking associate with you again, and so that I know to beat you over the head with a fucking lamp if I ever see you in person, because something bright needs to make contact with your thick goddamned skulls. And don't even try to give me your dipshit Alex Jones/Charlie Sheen/Rosie O'Donnell/back page of some used toilet paper of a worthless anusbreath socialist newsletter horseshit "Loose Change" tardbucket drivel that's been debunked by everyone smarter than burnt toast a thousand fucking times over. I'm serious; you people need to be held underwater until the bubbles stop. You're worthless. Fucking worthless. You and your whole goddamned outfit are worthless. Die in a fire, and come back to life so you can die in another fire. Jeez.
despicable excuse for a human being ping
This is very revealing. Obviously he isn't a Christian, and his taste for evil retribution against people whose views undermine his real agenda strongly suggest that his screen name was chosen to throw us off the track. We're supposed to assume that he's an ordinary, garden variety American who seeks the truth and who has calmly examined the facts and reached a different conclusion, but now he reveals something akin to bare fear at the prospect of the truth being exposed, and the willingness to kill any innocent to prevent that. This passion is identical to that which we see from the special interest (to the exclusion of all others) who were and still are petrified of a closer exam of the USS Liberty attack. Now, what does that tell you?
Just the fact that it happened at all is kooky, and to think only 14 or so people were able to carry off such a sophisticated operation is what is kooky IMO.
Good God! What anger, why would not believing the official govt. version inspire such venom in some people? Thanks for posting that Arator, was not quite sure if it was safe to click on that link! That is weird some person/s want to shoot Truthers in the head. That person needs to be more concerned with murderers and rapists and such.
Question: Who is it that considers it a birthright to murder any and all who dare expose unflattering truths that they wish to bury forever? Who is it that has no concern for his immortal soul and isn't bound by any such limitations when wishing pure evil (his old and reliable friend) on those of us who still stand for principles that this person and like minded others have never embraced, and indeed regard as weakness? Who is it who often pretends to be a mid western, plaid shirt corn fed American then eventually reveals a dark, alien (middle eastern) philosophy that must be hidden in order to sell the ruse and be taken seriously? Who is it that is always better served by lies, murder and deceit than honor, truth and respect for human life? Who is it that's trying to convince Americans that torture, murder and any unspeakable acts that will facilitate their desired goal is acceptable and working within moral guidelines (either Christian or even international law) is not only for the weak but the antithesis of fundamentals beliefs that must be forced on others but never fully revealed for fear of horrifiyng the unsuspecting hosts? If you examine the two faces of coc you'll see a familiar evil come into focus....
Same here, it defies logic.
uh huh.
Hey how are you?!
I think he was a very fast typer, some of his stuff had to answer directly to specific questions. I got angry with him shortly before he left and called him a f*cking creep. Normally I didn't lose my temper with him though.
Whoever wrote that needs to be in a rubber room in order to protect society.
Sociopath with much pent-up rage, could go postal!!!
This is reminiscent of a screed I was subjected to at LP shortly before I was banned. The PsychoSexual insults are familiar; in this case the only aspect missing is a reference to severe and damaging anal sex, which was rather adroitly addressed to me there. It is a sign of fascistic mindset (See the movie "SALO" by Paolo Pier Pasolini for an exposition of the connection between fascism and really hard core sexual perversion, genital obsession and excretory stimulation - if you dare - it's not any easy flick to take) that when confronted with something they don't like, resort to nasty sado- sexual insults. Makes you realize where the S&M dungeons of AbuGhraib and Gitmo came from.
You were subjected to such an attack, that is creepy! I've seen this happen a few times what you are talking about, I don't quite understand the mentality, it must be a male sexual perversion of sorts, that much I've concluded. I've noticed it on LP, when they don't like someone, they gang up on that person and throw homo accusations at them that get somewhat graphic involving anal sex and such, it always makes me wonder if those throwing the insults have violent homosexual fantasies as I don't think that is normal behavior. If I were to see that movie you are talking about it would probably give me nightmares! I do find such behavior very strange indeed.
Does anyone else think that "Can of Corn" really should get tested for rabies?
I say Epstein-Barr or Tay Sachs...
LOL! If only we were so lucky. Tay Sachs usually kills during the first few years of life (then again, rabies kills quickly too).
very very well done. just wow.
get a load of that and i dare you to deem HOUNDDAWG a goofy truther.
If only what ailes him were so easily cured. I'm afraid his problem might be deeper and harder to get at, somewhere down in the pitch black darkness of the void that once was his soul.
Check out my blog, America, the Bushieful.
what LP'er delivered that screed. do you recall?
And joined by those who post who regard it as their "favorite anti-twoofer rant".
Check out my blog, America, the Bushieful.
Alcuin, IIRC. The one who snitched to GL was BAC. :>> I posted a rather cute(!) photo that I googled using the phrase "eating shit" after alcuin gave me one of his anal fantasy insults, this one involving a baton! BAC took exception. There was another one involved in the fracas, but cannot recall who that was.
So this is what you believe. Where would you like to meet to carry out your desire Mr Can of Crap? I know what Fascists like you need. So, let me know.
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition whats so humorous about this.. the hypocrisy of this dolt abounds.. of course he cant see it.. hes a muslim hater.. a racist and has no compunction to call for the deaths of those he disagrees with.. I wonder if he washing cars for a living?
can of corn posted the link to it, he says it's his favorite rant.
I agree with Arator, it's an indication of a sick soul, besides insanity.
Very well said HD. If you examine the two faces of coc you'll see a familiar evil come into focus.... "The main purpose of the Council on Foreign Relations is promoting the disarmament of U.S. sovereignty and national independence and submergence into an all powerful, one world government." -- Rear Admiral Chester Ward Rear Admiral US Navy (retired), CFR member for 16 years, Judge Advocate General of the Navy 1956-60
It's worth signing in just to have cocka on bozo.
"First they ignore you. Then they ridicule you. Then they fight you. Then you win." --Mahatma Gandhi
Thank you.
maybe he will bring a buddy ? methinks we and sig would introduce some fast surprises.
http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Isa/Isa065.html http://www.blueletterbible.org/tsk_b/Isa/65/16.html
Those who want to stick their fingers in their ears and go "NAH NAH NAH, I can't hear you, Bush and the Joos did it," and not want to know the truth? foretold: http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Eze/Eze038.html#16 Gog and Magog are "Jews": http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/13trindx.htm , Rev. 2:9, 3:9 Christian America is Israel now: http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Gal/Gal003.html#29 ".... The United States of America is the nationality that is promised in the prophetic Scriptures to arise in the latter times Restored. It has long been a favorite theory, both with Jewish and Christian writers, that the nationality to be gathered together in the latter days, was understood to mean the returned or restoration of the scattered sons of Abraham to the land of Palestine. We are not surprised at the confidence with which this opinion has been entertained from age to age, because it is a legitimate a priori interpretation, seeing this nationality is called "Israel" by the prophets. In a conversation had with a venerable Bishop of the Episcopal Church, he inquired of us: "Sir, by what construction of language do you make the great nationality, promised to arise in the latter times, to mean the United States? That the Bible authorizes us to expect such a nationality there can be no doubt; but how do you make out that nationality to be the United States of America, as it was promised to be Israel?" To which we replied: "Beloved Bishop, the predictions of the prophets are put up in Hebrew dress; the regalia is Mosaic, the custom is Israelitish. They did not say, friends of civil and religious liberty, Americans, or even Christians; but they used the best terms they had on hand: they said 'Israel.'" ....." A DEFENSE OF ARMAGEDDON or Our Great Country Foretold In The Holy Scriptures
This is the writing can of corn has just admitted that he admires, in fact it's his favorite "anti-twoofer" rant. So he actually does enjoy applying the 1st amendment, when it suits him. There is obviously no need to be polite to him when he lies and spins, that's not his "favorite" type of rant. That all said, Truthers need to get shot in the back of the fucking head. Every last one of them. Line 'em up against the wall like the St. Valentine's Day Massacre. Fucking lame-dick conspiracy theorist tinfoil-hat fucktards, every fucking last douchebag piss-gargling one of them. IQ of fucking mayonnaise, I swear. I'm so sick of the vacuum-skulled pissant walking piles of drooling slime clod motherfuckers being looked at as if they have a valid fucking opinion, and NOT being thrown into a fucking rubber room where they fucking belong. And if you number amongst these witless shitstains, let me know right here and now so that I can never fucking associate with you again, and so that I know to beat you over the head with a fucking lamp if I ever see you in person, because something bright needs to make contact with your thick goddamned skulls. And don't even try to give me your dipshit Alex Jones/Charlie Sheen/Rosie O'Donnell/back page of some used toilet paper of a worthless anusbreath socialist newsletter horseshit "Loose Change" tardbucket drivel that's been debunked by everyone smarter than burnt toast a thousand fucking times over. I'm serious; you people need to be held underwater until the bubbles stop. You're worthless. Fucking worthless. You and your whole goddamned outfit are worthless. Die in a fire, and come back to life so you can die in another fire. Jeez.
Just ignore "Crock of Crap" and maybe "it" will evaporate like a fart !
"Sarah, if the people had ever known the truth about what we Bushes have done to this nation, we would be chased down in the streets and lynched." Bush 41 to reporter Sarah McClendon, June 1992
I look at it this way: he's his own worst enemy. He's helping to bring to light the hidden things of darkness and ushering in the visible reign of Jesus Christ. You all do a good job of threshing. Micah 4:13. 1Cr 4:5 Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts: and then shall every man have praise of God.
#2. To: can of corn (#0)
#3. To: MING THE MERCILESS (#2)
your a joke.
#4. To: can of corn (#0)
#5. To: Arator (#4)
Your willful ignorance is breathtaking.
#6. To: Cynicom, arator (#5)
#7. To: robin (#1)
(Edited)
#8. To: can of corn (#6)
(Edited)
Hey, take a look at my favorite anti-twoofer rant
#9. To: aristeides (#7)
#10. To: can of corn (#9)
The Bush Administration couldn't even keep his wiretapping programs from being leaked. It's idiocy to suggest he could pull off a job like this without somebody leaking it.
Formerly Fun and Happy Balls.
Formerly balls alert.
Formerly tinfoil wonderballs.
Formerly trilateralballs
Formerly statist miniballs
Formerly balls beat
Formerly Yomin Postelballs
Formerly ballwitch muncher
Formerly tuna piano but not tune your balls
Formerly llort daerter balls
Formerly cone of balls
Presently can of balls
#11. To: can of corn (#0)
After all, given the inability of small groups of people to keep small secrets, there is no way that a large group of people could possibly keep "the truth" hidden if 9/11 was a government conspiracy.
#12. To: aristeides (#7)
the secret of our having cracked the Enigma German cypher machine was kept for 30 years or so
#13. To: can of corn (#9)
And BTW, since hijackers didn't really fly planes with passengers into the WTCs, where are those planes and passengers and crew now? I'd love to here how Bush was supposed to have all these whisked away secretly without anyone noticing. You think Babara Olsen is now living on some secluded Pacific island?
#14. To: aristeides (#13)
I haven't committed myself to any particular theory of what happened on 9/11,
#15. To: can of corn (#14)
#16. To: can of corn (#14)
Nor do any of the twoofers
#17. To: aristeides (#15)
That our air defense system failed to perform as it always had you think is a piece of minutiae?
#18. To: can of corn (#17)
WRONG
#19. To: can of corn (#17)
#20. To: aristeides (#19)
#21. To: can of corn (#20)
(Edited)
No, the link I gave you addresses the rebuttals as well as refuting the original claim.
#22. To: ... (#18)
Who in God's name would click a link posted by a troll such as yourself?
#23. To: can of corn (#22)
(Edited)
Those who want to stick their fingers in their ears and go "NAH NAH NAH, I can't hear you, Bush and the Joos did it," and not want to know the truth?
#24. To: ... (#21)
Then why don't you post them here and go through them?
#25. To: can of corn (#20)
#26. To: can of corn (#24)
Because, there are many links within the link I gave adressing all the points, and the arguments are long and detailed, and it's not practical to post them here.
#27. To: can of corn, Tauzero, christine, HOUNDDAWG, robin (#0)
The Best Rebuttal To The Truthers
#28. To: can of corn (#24)
I'm sorry that no Alex Jones' type 30 second sound bite is available. I'm aware that that is what the twoofers normally consider "proof."
#29. To: JiminyC (#27)
#30. To: can of corn (#24)
#31. To: ... (#26)
#32. To: can of corn (#17)
That our air defense system failed to perform as it always had you think is a piece of minutiae?
WRONG "Sixty seven times in the year before 9/11/01 planes were off course and fighter jets responded, so where were the fighter jets on 9/11? It's more than incompetent, it's criminal"
9/11 USAF Stand DownOn 9/11 there was no reaction from the USAF as hijacked aircraft flew through US airspace and plowed into buildings. This lack of response is inconceivable unless the USAF was stood down. Careful planning made this easy to achieve. 
VOICE TWO: Do we want to think about scrambling aircraft?
VOICE ONE: Oh, God, I don't know.
VOICE TWO: That's a decision somebody's going to have to make probably in the next ten minutes.
VOICE ONE: Oh, you know, everybody just left the room.Dr. Robert Bowman, a man so decorated with medals and honors they could fill a patriotic Christmas tree, has joined the ranks of those who are declaring that the attacks on 9/11 were an inside job. As right wing world comes tumbling down, more prominent individuals are coming forward with their doubts and concerns with the official report. Some have little more than the powers of their own deduction, others are expert engineers and physicists. Dr. Bowman has inside knowledge of military protocol, and has stated that it is apparent to him that the massive military exercises that took place on September 11, 2001 were intentionally staged to confuse civil defenses. The person who headed those exercises? None other then Richard Cheney, otherwise known as Dead-eye Dick. [Choice Changes] 
"If a stand down order were given it probably would have to come from at least as high as the vice president." 
There was a young man who came in and said to the vice president "The plane [Flight 77] is 50 miles out" [from Washington], "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?" It is obvious the above orders did not involve defending Washington.
#33. To: can of corn (#31)
#34. To: robin (#32)
"Sixty seven times in the year before 9/11/01 planes were off course and fighter jets responded, so where were the fighter jets on 9/11? It's more than incompetent, it's criminal"
#35. To: ... (#33)
#36. To: can of corn (#35)
(Edited)
I'm doing nothing more than demonstrating you have no desire to know the truth and wish to wallow in your paranoid delusional fantasies.
#37. To: can of corn, BAC (#34)
#38. To: can of corn (#34)
#39. To: ... (#30)
What is next?
#40. To: can of corn (#34)
#41. To: BTP Holdings (#39)
#42. To: aristeides (#37)
Enemies of the Republic
#43. To: aristeides (#37)
That looks an awful lot like a BAC posting.
#44. To: ... (#36)
Please post my views on the 911 truth movement, i.e., my paranoid delusional fantasies on the subject, and provide a link to back up your claim.
#45. To: can of corn (#43)
#46. To: can of corn, ... (#44)
No I haven't seen much of what you've posted.
#47. To: Critter (#42)
#48. To: aristeides, ... (#46)
Meaning you had absolutely no justification for your accusation of paranoia.
#49. To: aristeides (#46)
#50. To: can of corn (#49)
#51. To: aristeides (#50)
#52. To: can of corn (#51)
From Publishers Weekly
#53. To: aristeides (#52)
I wonder if you bothered to read the reviews.
#54. To: can of corn, Zipporah, robin, rowdee, christine, lodwick, Jethro Tull, JC Harris (#31)
(Edited)
# The hijacked planes should still have been tracked on radar, even if their transponders were turned off
#55. To: HOUNDDAWG (#54)
#56. To: IndieTX (#55)
(Edited)
#57. To: can of corn, Cynicom, Arator, Dakmar, bluedogtxn, Calamity, Vitamin Z, kiki, Jethro Tull, Zipporah, Eoghan, robnoel, HOUNDDAWG, Mekons4, tom007, Yertle Turtle, JC Harris, Lady X, JiminyC (#6)
To: Cynicom, arator
"Guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism." ~George Washington
Ron Paul for President
#58. To: robin, IndieTx, JCHarris, Zipporah (#57)
#59. To: robin, christine, Zipporah, Jethro Tull, rowdee, (#57)
(Edited)
#60. To: can of corn (#0)
[T]o believe in many of these kooky conspiracy theories, you have to believe that tens of thousands, maybe even hundreds of thousands of Republicans, Democrats, Independents, politicians, bureaucrats, journalists, FBI agents, and CIA agents all know about an incredibly complex, monstrous plot against the United States,
#61. To: Arator, can or corn, All (#8)
"That all said, Truthers need to get shot in the back of the fucking head. Every last one of them. Line 'em up against the wall like the St. Valentine's Day Massacre. Fucking lame-dick conspiracy theorist tinfoil-hat fucktards, every fucking last douchebag piss-gargling one of them."
#62. To: christine (#58)
#63. To: aristeides (#13)
I haven't committed myself to any particular theory of what happened on 9/11, merely to the conclusion that the official account of 9/11 is itself so absurd as to be unbelievable.
#64. To: HOUNDDAWG (#59)
This passion is identical to that which we see from the special interest (to the exclusion of all others) who were and still are petrified of a closer exam of the USS Liberty attack.
#65. To: can of corn (#34)
#66. To: aristeides, Critter, ... (#47)
I always used to wonder how BAC was able to produce those enormous tomes within seconds.
#67. To: robin (#57)
That all said, Truthers need to get shot in the back of the fucking head. Every last one of them. Line 'em up against the wall like the St. Valentine's Day Massacre. Fucking lame-dick conspiracy theorist tinfoil-hat fucktards, every fucking last douchebag piss-gargling one of them. IQ of fucking mayonnaise, I swear. I'm so sick of the vacuum-skulled pissant walking piles of drooling slime clod motherfuckers being looked at as if they have a valid fucking opinion, and NOT being thrown into a fucking rubber room where they fucking belong.
#68. To: robin (#57)
And don't even try to give me your dipshit Alex Jones/Charlie Sheen/Rosie O'Donnell/back page of some used toilet paper of a worthless anusbreath socialist newsletter horseshit "Loose Change" tardbucket drivel that's been debunked by everyone smarter than burnt toast a thousand fucking times over. I'm serious; you people need to be held underwater until the bubbles stop. You're worthless. Fucking worthless. You and your whole goddamned outfit are worthless. Die in a fire, and come back to life so you can die in another fire. Jeez.
#69. To: Diana (#68)
#70. To: swarthyguy (#69)
when confronted with something they don't like, resort to nasty sado- sexual insults.
#71. To: Arator, can of corn (#8)
"That all said, Truthers need to get shot in the back of the fucking head. Every last one of them. Line 'em up against the wall like the St. Valentine's Day Massacre. Fucking lame-dick conspiracy theorist tinfoil-hat fucktards, every fucking last douchebag piss-gargling one of them."
#72. To: Rupert_Pupkin (#71)
“Yes, but is this good for Jews?"
#73. To: Eoghan (#72)
(Edited)
I say Epstein-Barr or Tay Sachs...
#74. To: HOUNDDAWG (#54)
There are simply no legitimate unanticipated contingencies that could have permitted four airliners to have defeated the multi billion dollar redundant air safety and defense systems that terrible day, unless it was allowed to happen.
#75. To: HOUNDDAWG, YertleTurtle (#54)
#76. To: Rupert_Pupkin, can of corn (#71)
(Edited)
Does anyone else think that "Can of Corn" really should get tested for rabies?
#77. To: swarthyguy (#69)
#78. To: Diana (#67)
Whoever wrote that needs to be in a rubber room in order to protect society.
#79. To: christine (#77)
(Edited)
#80. To: robin, CHRISTINE, CAN OF CORN, CAONOFCRAP, JCHARRIS, btp holdings (#57)
That all said, Truthers need to get shot in the back of the fucking head. Every last one of them. Line 'em up against the wall like the St. Valentine's Day Massacre. Fucking lame-dick conspiracy theorist tinfoil-hat fucktards, every fucking last douchebag piss-gargling one of them. IQ of fucking mayonnaise, I swear. I'm so sick of the vacuum-skulled pissant walking piles of drooling slime clod motherfuckers being looked at as if they have a valid fucking opinion, and NOT being thrown into a fucking rubber room where they fucking belong. And if you number amongst these witless shitstains, let me know right here and now so that I can never fucking associate with you again, and so that I know to beat you over the head with a fucking lamp if I ever see you in person, because something bright needs to make contact with your thick goddamned skulls
#81. To: IndieTX (#80)
#82. To: Diana (#67)
"Guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism." ~George Washington
Ron Paul for President
#83. To: robin, Arator, christine, YertleTurtle (#82)
#84. To: HOUNDDAWG (#62)
#85. To: robin (#82)
#86. To: Calamity (#84)
#87. To: IndieTX (#80)
#88. To: can of corn (#0)
#89. To: can of corn (#22)
#90. To: robin, can of corn (#57)
Hey, take a look at my favorite anti-twoofer rant
#91. To: AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt (#90)
#92. To: noone222 (#91)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
