The content on this webpage contains paid/affiliate links. When you click on any of our affiliate link, we/I may get a small compensation at no cost to you. See our affiliate disclosure for more info -----------------------
Last updated on August 9th, 2017 at 02:17 pm
The Guardian’s Marina Hyde deals with a Hollywood intellectual:
Pay attention, civilians. Actor Charlie Sheen has been focusing his mind on the official explanation for 9/11. And you know what? He’s not buying it. “It just didn’t look like any commercial jetliner I’ve flown on any time in my life,” the Hotshots Part Deux star told a US radio station this week, “and then when the buildings came down later on that day, I said to my brother ‘call me insane’, but did it sorta look like those buildings came down in a controlled demolition?”
You’re insane. Next.
- Journalistic attention paid to another Sheen. The reporters are calling him a fool, but they seem to have a problem learning from experience themselves…Posted by richard mcenroe on 2006 03 26 at 02:49 AM • permalink
- Paco, the evil VRWC plan to further the on-air stupidity of the Sheen clan has scored another glorious victory!
I TOLD you that telling him he could order cheap cocaine-filled hookers via Joe Viall’s old site would cause him to read Crazy (and dead) Joe’s “investigations” in to the Pyongyang-based International Zionist cabal taking over the world, and that his brain would explode as a result.
I think the tipping point was this passage from Crazy Joe:
“Proof that the [9/11] attack was solely against Zionist Headquarters and not against Americans in general is everywhere, at least for those who bother to look carefully. Remember the attackers had the same absolute surprise on their side as the Japanese at Pearl Harbor, and they also knew that peacetime America could not arm and fly its interceptor aircraft in less than one hour. Even a cursory examination of the flight records for that morning shows a minimum of thirty other Boeing 767 and 757 aircraft airborne, available, and within easy reach of heavily populated cities and urban areas. Had this really been an attack against Americans in general, tens of thousands of citizens in Washington, New York, Chicago, San Francisco and Los Angeles would have been toast by 9.30 AM.
The actual timing of the attack was almost certainly triggered by Operation Shekhinah, a Zionist plan to use Jewish forces in Palestine to launch a Blitzkrieg on southern Iraq during early October 2001, thereby taking control of the head of the Persian Gulf, and in turn de-facto control of middle east oil supplies. The operation was being funded through WTC conduits, which also housed certain Command, Control and Communications elements essential to the strike. So when the WTC crumbled into dust, Operation Shekhinah was forced onto “hold”.
In the aftermath of the surgical strike, the media swiftly hyped up all sorts of rubbish about “Osama Bin Laden” in his Afghan cave, and creatively drafted “cell phone messages” from the hijacked airliners, which by then were flying at nearly 600 mph, way too fast for any cell phone tower to interrogate, authenticate, and connect any individual cell phone, before that cell phone was once more completely out of range of the respective tower.”I still miss Joe. He wrote the most hilarious conspiracy theories. But thanks to the VRWC, his site is still up. Yay for us!
MarkL
canberraPS, if people want to visit Crazy Joe’s site, go to http://www.vialls.com/
Be warned, his stuff is so funny that you may well rupture yourself laughing. Especially about the Zionist mini-nukes. Under NO circumstances have any liquids near the computer when reading.
This public health warning was brought to you by VRWC Minion Control Centre.
“Licking the Jackboots of evil imperialist running-dog aggressors and oppressors since 1872”
- Ok, I’ll ask it. Why only since 1872?Posted by Stop Continental Drift! on 2006 03 26 at 04:47 AM • permalink
- #10 Dave S:
“I’d love for Charlie to explain exactly what was so odd looking about them.”
I think what looked so odd was those pods on the alleged aircraft.
See, the remotely controlled alleged aircraft were actually fitted with missiles in their “pod” protuberances, which were fired into the WTC buildings prior to impact.
That is why they looked “odd”. Of course, it was all a Zionist plot, and we all know that over 4,000 Jooooz failed to turn up for work on the morning of 11/9/01.
In the light of all of Charlie Sheen’s incisive intellectual analysis, I think that it is about time we just surrendered in Iraq, and withdrew all our troops.
- The 9/11 Commission appears to have helped feed some of the conspiracy theories by saying nothing about how the World Trade Centre 7 building managed to completely collapse about 4pm that day, due only to fire damage (they didn’t look like huge fires on TV) and some wreckage hitting the lower floors.
The Commission’s report wiped the floor with all the other theories kicking around, but they didn’t touch WTC 7. And from the little look around I’ve done, people like Sheen are using this major oversight as a headliner to thrust their other conspiracies front and centre.
Is this the first time in history a steel and glass 40-something storey building has collapsed completely due only to fire damage? Apparently so, or so claims the 9/11 Troooth Movement.
And Bush did say he saw the first plane smash into the WTC on television. He said it twice! Christ knows why. The 9/11 Troothers are all over that, too.
But distrust of the Bush government’s motives fuels a lot of this stuff. I was in the US in 2001 and went to the WTC site in early October and there were more than a few rescue workers who had plenty to say about what happened on September 11, and not much of it followed the official version (or what the media was touting as the official version at the time).
Many of the resuce workers had lost friends and family members and they wanted to blame someone else other than dead terrorists or Bin Laden, and Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld were alive and much closer.
Some of the 9/11 conspiracy sites I just glanced at look stupedously detailed, mindnumbingly so, and I was surprised to see how many 9/11 widows have got caught up in all this stuff.
Charlie Sheen may be a hooker-crazed, drug-addled loon, but he sure seems to have tapped into a mega-popular belief system for millions of Americans right now. But will all this attention bump up the ratings for ‘Two And A Half Men’? I’m sure he’s hoping so.
Personally, I blame Glurbal Worming for 9/11. And Clinton. And Gough Whitlam. And the Carlyle Group. And Nixon. And Napoleon. And Saddam…Oh, and don’t forget the Zionist New Wold Order Control Corporation For Global Domination And Mind Control Of Gullible Gentiles (ZNWOCCFGDAMCOGG).
You know they’re hiding something…
Posted by LeftieLatteLover on 2006 03 26 at 05:13 AM • permalink
- No wonder he’s such a wooden actor. His head is made of wood.Posted by Blithering Bunny on 2006 03 26 at 06:21 AM • permalink
- #12, a Kombi van? Memory loss is just one sign of excessive usage of the Jesus herb.
And #13, you must never take your head out of your own arse even to breathe if you don’t think millions of Americans are believing the kind of gunk Sheen is talking about. Even Sheen isn’t deluded enough to put his name to crap like that if he didn’t think he had a few million already on his side.
Posted by LeftieLatteLover on 2006 03 26 at 06:47 AM • permalink
- Charlie Sheen’s a ‘Hollywood intellectual’?
I thought Barbra Streisand had that job description under copyright.
I really should get out more often.Posted by SwinishCapitalist on 2006 03 26 at 07:09 AM • permalink
- SwinishCapitalist
Charlie Sheen’s a ‘Hollywood intellectual’?
I thought Barbra Streisand had that job description under copyright.Well actually Barbra IS, just because she can’t spell intillictuel and would think a description, is something one takes for an illness. I mean come on, don’t sell her short. There is a giant mass of gray matter, behind those crossed eyes of hers.
Charlie…yoo hoo Charlie? Next you’re going to tell everyone that there really is no Santa Claus. Charlie…since your father’s REALname is Ramon Estevez, is he a legal alien…and I do mean alien. Oh yeah…he’s ok, just read he was born in Ohio.
- Texas Bob, do you really think those tens of thousands of websites, the hundreds of thousands of downloads of 9/11 conspiracy movies on Google Video, all those book sales, all those CNN and other media polls claiming 60-80% of people think the government is hiding something….do you think all those numbers come from just a few thousand true believers in a 9/11 conspiracy?
I didn’t say they were right, Bob, nor did I say I believe any of that crap Sheen is talking about, but it is well obvious that millions of Americans are subscribing to these beliefs, for whatever reason. From what I’ve seen today alone, the traffic to those websites, the video sales, the book sales, the video downloads, all those numbers are generated by the interest of millions, not thousands.
I’m not trying to bag out Americans or say they’re stupid or gullible, I was trying to make the point that Sheen wouldn’t stick himself out front and centre like that if he didn’t think he had millions on his side who subscribed to the theories that he claims he believes in.
Maybe it’s only two or three million at the most who distrust the government in this way, but that’s still enough for Sheen to get plenty of attention, and he sure as hell is getting attention right now. CNN ran something in the past few days, and they actually treated him somewhat seriously from what I can see, unlike The Guardian who rightly mocked him for being a fuckwit.
Posted by LeftieLatteLover on 2006 03 26 at 09:21 AM • permalink
- LeftyLatteLover, I said substantiate it. Provide proof of what you say. I could say that today alone, I’ve seen web traffic, video sales, book sales, and video downloads of your father’s infamous manatee escapade that reflect millions of peoples interest in such disgusting behavior and be on equal footing with you. Where is the proof of your claims?
- Texas Bob,
You are establishing that it’s possible for a Texan to be full of shit. We always knew that, of course. (Note that I’m a Texan myself.)
I just googled “wtc conspiracy”. Here are some of the first few results:
http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cfm?ChannelID=89
http://www.prisonplanet.com/analysis_lavello_050503_bombs.html
http://www.cyberspaceorbit.com/WTCspiracy.htm
There are lots more, and other keywords bring up more yet. As LLL points out, it’s an industry. Industries are not supported by isolated lone wackos. There have to be at least a few million of them, or the salami slices get too big.
Regards,
Ric
- #23. I ask for proof, therefore I’m full of shit. Hmmm. NO WAY are you a Texan (transplant/invader maybe).
You send three links to nutjob websites and that proves MILLIONS of Americans believe what LLL, and now you, claim?
You’ve proved that three websites sell this BS. Nothing more.Regards,
BobPS: Go back to Jersey!
- Personally, I blame Glurbal Worming for 9/11. And Clinton. And Gough Whitlam. And the Carlyle Group. And Nixon. And Napoleon. And Saddam…Oh, and don’t forget the Zionist New Wold Order Control Corporation For Global Domination And Mind Control Of Gullible Gentiles (ZNWOCCFGDAMCOGG).
Naw, I just blame Xenu.
Posted by Bruce Rheinstein on 2006 03 26 at 10:51 AM • permalink
Even Sheen isn’t deluded enough to put his name to crap like that if he didn’t think he had a few million already on his side.
Ah, the consensus argument crops up again. “All these people believe it, so there must be some truth to it!”
This is not proof that the story is true (or not). It’s merely evidence that Charlie Sheen is following one particular crowd.
A crowd that is likely delusional, IMHO. But still a crowd.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 03 26 at 11:00 AM • permalink
- “Also taking a position round the table comes this column’s beloved Tom Cruise, who famously dismisses psychiatry as a big conspiracy. Which is a little like a dehydrated man claiming water is a conspiracy.”
Well said!
Posted by Jim Treacher on 2006 03 26 at 11:17 AM • permalink
- #26, thank you Jeffs, that’s exactly what I was trying to point out. Sheen has attached himself to a massive subculture in the US (and Europe as well, apparently) and as the first famous person to try and back these conspiracy claims, he has found himself a fast little gig as spokesman of the moment.
And Bob, if you are unable to do your own Google searches to see just how much stuff is out there on this subject, then let me babysit you through some of this process. It’s really quite simple, and extremely disturbing to see just how big this monster is becoming. I’m going back to my favourite ‘Moon Landing Is A Hoax’ websites to catch my breath.
One site I just saw, http://www.prisonplanet.com, is whack-job central, and they are all over the Sheen-9/11 lunacy. Alexa ranks them within the top 9000 websites in the world. PP claims inside their site they are getting traffic in the range of 200,000 plus unique visitors a day. That’s every bloody day. That is disturbing for 200,000 plus reasons.
From a brief lookaround, the ‘New York’ Magazine has recently run a remarkably dry and straightforward story on the 9/11 Truth Movement (as they call themselves), as have Maxim, the Boston Herald, dozens of other US publications in the last few weeks alone, and this was before Sheen popped up bleeting his bullshit.
CNN is running yet another story on this subject tonight, multi-million viewer US entertainment shows are running stories right now from what I can see online. If they thought millions of Americans were instantly going to change channels, do you really think they would run this crap?
They know the audience is there, that’s why they’re covering this ‘story’.
And CNN has published a poll where it claims 40,000 responses in 24 hours with 80% voting ‘Yes, the government lied about 9/11’, or some such varaint, for what it’s worth, which is probably not much at all.
It’s pretty obvious from the previous posts that nobody here is claiming there is any truth to any of this madness, only that there are millions of Americans who do believe it, or believe some of what Sheen is claiming, and that number is probably in the low millions. Hopefully.
Okay, Bob? Done enough research for you now?
If you do go looking, no doubt you will be as shocked as I was to see how organised this so 9/11 Truth Movement actually is. They’ve got Republican senators on board and a few dozen 9/11 widows and family members (or so they claim), plus former CIA, FBI, DoD staffers and agents and analysts.
From the http://www.911Truth.org site there is a network linking frigging hundreds of sites, selling hundreds of books and videos. If there wasn’t an audience in the low millions, at least, there wouldn’t be this volume of product.
Bob, you really do shout and scream a lot when anyone says something you don’t want to hear, and which you can’t be bothered spending two minutes trying to confirm or disprove yourself, which you should go and do if you doubt everything I say so thoroughly. Just because you don’t believe a figure cited, Bob, doesn’t mean it isn’t true.
Happy, and disturbing, hunting.
Posted by LeftieLatteLover on 2006 03 26 at 12:21 PM • permalink
- LLL, you seem to be spreading quite a bit of propaganda yourself, laying out all this “research”, while at the same time claiming you’re not “one of them”. And yet this “research” all seems to come from the very sites you say are full of whackjobs. Is it any wonder that none of us trust you? You make a big show of being right-wing, and yet you continually put up posts repeating moonbat crap and telling us “millions” believe it.
Camouflage and subterfuge, thou lovest latte.
As for Charlie Sheen, he’s a nutbag whore-loving cokehead who was raised in an ultra-leftist household. Why would any sane person take his word for anything?
- “Sheen has attached himself to a massive subculture in the US”
You’ve yet to provide any real support for this assertion. The closest you’ve come is to point out that some CNN on-line (i.e. non-scientific) poll found that people thought the government had lied. Ask Americans if the government lied about anything and the default position is generally “yes”, but that’s a far cry from their subscribing to Sheen-like moonbatery.
Posted by Bruce Rheinstein on 2006 03 26 at 12:53 PM • permalink
- #31, #32, I was asked by Bob to prove why I wrote that millions of Americans think along the same lines as Chuckles Sheen does, so I attempted to try and show why millions do by pointing out the existence of a massive volume of 9/11 conspiracy product, which continues to grow in volume, and the fact that there are hundreds if not thousands of sites touting this stuff pulling stupendous numbers of unique viewers (as in a lot of people visiting these sites every day).
Who the frig do you think is pumping this 9/11 industry with cash? A few thousand nutters? Obviously this industry is kept alive and is thriving by the interest level of millions of people. I don’t particularly care, RebeccaH what you think of me, or my views, but this ridiculous round and round argument about a pretty easy to confirm fact is beyond boring. If a Google Video is downloaded hundreds of thousands of times in a few weeks (as the 9/11 ones on GoogVid appear to have been) doesn’t that tell you that something close to hundreds of thousands are downloading the frigging videos?
I thought some of you might actually be interested to know what I found out in a few minutes of research, purely to show that Sheen has hitched his horses to the front of a very long wagon train indeed and why he is now getting way too much attention for his delusiosn. Delusions that are obviously also believed by millions in the US. Goodnight, straw men, and straw women.
Posted by LeftieLatteLover on 2006 03 26 at 01:13 PM • permalink
- It’s a hell of a leap between finding the hundreds of Internet-based conspiracy sites that have jumped on board the 9/11-conspiracy bandwagon, and asserting that millions of Americans believe the government was behind it. Michael Rivero, at al., spawn plenty of websites, but relatively few followers.
You’ve provided plenty of verbiage but no support for your amazing proposition. In short, you’re a troll.
Posted by Bruce Rheinstein on 2006 03 26 at 01:25 PM • permalink
- LLL, I predicted to myself that you would react to my post with anger, and I was right. But frankly, I don’t care what you care about.
What Bruce Rheinstein and others here have been trying to tell you is that you could have made your point by saying something like “Charlie Sheen spouted conspiracy nonsense and there sure are a lot of nutballs out there who believe it”. And we would have agreed. But you went on and on, citing this website and that website, insisting that a vast, growing segment of the population, numbering in the “millions”, believes this kind of thing. Your point seems to be that if “millions” believe it, then gee, there might be something to it. You do this with almost every thread you get involved with.
If your plan is to persuade anyone here that there is indeed “something to it”, you must have a low opinion of our intelligence, because you certainly haven’t provided convincing proof. Or perhaps you’re just very young and overly proud of your skills.
Sorry for the O/T, Andrea.
- I’m confused. If this was a planned demolition, to provoke the American people, why were so many people, including my family members, permitted to escape the buildings? If 3,000 dead were enough to goad the American people into accepting the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, wouldn’t 30,000 dead have furthered the Bush Konspiracy’s needs even further? Hell, if it was a controlled demolition, why not wait till 10 A.M., when EVERYBODY would have been at work?
I guess me am not smart like actor or liberal poster…
Posted by richard mcenroe on 2006 03 26 at 02:05 PM • permalink
- LLL, adding more shit to the pile, just gets you a bigger pile of shit. This is your proof that MILLIONS of Americans are subscribing to this BS? Luck you aren’t in court. You’d probably swing. I’ll try to spell it our so that pudding you call brain matter might absorb it. P-R-O-O-F. Give some proof of what you say. Substantiate the numbers. Links to moonbat websites is not P-R-O-O-F. You are the one claiming MILLIONS. YOU frickin prove it! I’m not chasing after ANY ridiculous thing you say. Because I already know that you are making these numbers up.
And for your crack about shouting and anyone who doesn’t agree with me, you’ve confused ME with YOU. Don’t get all pissy with me because your father lusted after a
- LLL, I truly believe that you ought to take a break, calm down, and then carefully read this post again.Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 03 26 at 04:32 PM • permalink
- You know Charlie is standing on ice just a little too thin for my size elevens but his comfort in voicing these doubts is just another indication of how Bush’s puny poll numbers are emboldening those who find his constant lies just too hard to swallow anymore.
I cannot stand beside Charlie on this one but I support his feelings that we have been sold a deceptive bill of goods.
And you have to admit that “Two and a half men” is a riot!
- Slightly O/T.
The philosopher Karl Popper said this about conspiracy theories: They arise when people first say, ‘There is no God’, and then ask, ‘Well, who’s in charge?’ If the Internet had been operating 30 years ago it would have been packed tight with UFO Conspiracy sites, showing all those photos of hubcaps and saucepan lids spinning through the air. I believed in UFOs myself at the time. Then one day I asked myself, ‘What are they waiting for? Why don’t they just land and stop fucking about with us?’ Inevitable conclusion: life may exist on other planets, but it doesn’t come to ours to play dodgem cars in the sky.
Conspiracy theories don’t explain a thing. They don’t simplify, they complicate, adding one more link to the chain when a question can’t be answered. ‘They’re a part of it, too.’ Nowadays, when I hear talk about conspiracies, or secret deals, or dark cabals, my bullshit detector goes straight into the red zone. And it stays there until solid proof for the claim can be provided.
Thank you, one and all, I’ll get off my soapbox now.Posted by SwinishCapitalist on 2006 03 26 at 05:05 PM • permalink
- So you cannot stand beside an idiot; you can just agree with what he says. Gotcha.
And you could only have made that “Two and A Half Men” on a board in a country where they can’t see the show…
Posted by richard mcenroe on 2006 03 26 at 05:07 PM • permalink
- El Cid
There is a giant mass of gray matter, behind those crossed eyes of hers.
Nice one! The first coffee of the morning tastes even better with that.Posted by SwinishCapitalist on 2006 03 26 at 05:26 PM • permalink
- I’ve got a serious question here. Really.
Sheen says some of this is based on the fact that the WTC collapses (this is especially used on WTC7) because “it sorta look(s) like those buildings came down in a controlled demolition?”
Okay. Here’s my question. How many of you have seen an ‘uncontrolled demolition’ of a 40-story or equivalent building? Big, steel-framed buildings do not just fall over, as I understanding the engineering principles. *IF* a big, steel-framed building collapses from fire or bombing or something ‘uncontrolled’ it may tilt slightly in that direction, but mostly is just falls straight down because that’s how physics works. The frame is in pieces, not a unified structure.
We use ‘controlled demolition’ to control not the fall, but the potential spray of detritus.
So. Are there videos of ‘uncontrolled demolition’ around that Charliem could have seen? Have any of you seen either in person or on video such a demolition? And, if so, how different did it look from a ‘controlled demolition’?
Posted by JorgXMcKie on 2006 03 26 at 05:37 PM • permalink
- If you don’t see a connection between the thousands of 9/11 Conspiracy products available and a growing audience (backed by the third citing of the hundreds of thousands of downloads on Google Video) that easily unmbers in the millions, then fine, don’t. Nothing will convince you because you’ve decided it simply can’t be true. It’s an industry, and Sheen is now the chief salesman.
#38, so now you slag my mother? You really are a disgusting, small-minded little toad, Texas Bog. I’ve seen some pretty disgusting things said about people here, and funnily enough, most of them come from you. Tim B. sure must be proud that his tens of thousands of daily visitors get to read your foul, noxious bile, always shouting “Prove it!” while ignoring any and all evidence and sticking your fingers in your eyes and squeezing your eyes shut like a petulant child.
God help you, you must be rotting from the inside out with all that hate festering away inside you.
Posted by LeftieLatteLover on 2006 03 26 at 06:01 PM • permalink
- Hey LLL, You better get used to this type of treatment here on this board. Though to be fair when these guys visited me at my blog they did present themselves as being fairly civilized.
Perhaps being on this site just brings out the worst in these fellas. You do realize that their point of view is under attack from many past Bush supporters?
They are starting to feel abandoned.
And LLL if you want to see where America is heading now then come check it out here http://theimmoralminority.blogspot.com/
- Anyone remember the 20/20 Barbara Waa Waa interview with Charlie Sheen? Sheen showed up late to the interview whacked on coke. He was very sweaty and had some twitchy body movements as well as odd facial ticks that are consistent with cocaine use -he was subtly grinding his teeth. The funny part of the whole affair was – if I remember correctly- this interview was to mark his return to show biz after attending rehab for coke and sex addiction.
- So what have we learned from LaLaLefty over the last few weeks to give him credibility? First, he informs us that there is a world wide movement by teenagers never to fight in another war and that will guarantee peace for all in the future. These apparently include Jihad teenies (as suicide bombings are not considered warlike acts by the CPT type peacewreckers, these teenies will still have an outlet for seeking 60 of their very own virgins.) He proclaims without any evidence that there will be no war with Iran. Then he throws suspicion on the fact that JillHad was associated with the Musliars. He lies about what Ann Coulter said. All this was just in the last few posts. And now he tells us he spent a few days in the USA soon after 9/11 and found Americans blame Bush ‘cause he’s closer than Osama. Hey, I thought you could tell how Americans felt about Bush from the elections. How come, with all those millions spending their cash on that conspiracy crap did Bush and the Republicans win the election overwhelmingly? I know you don’t answer questions that make you uncomfortable, so I’ll give you the answer. You know squat about Americans, even less than you know about the rest of the world. (And by the way, what is a teen-ager doing flying around the world in September? Whose payroll are you on, anyway?)
As for #23, I don’t think you’re from New Jersey, but from a park bench in the Boston Common waiting for the second coming of John Kerry. #48 Anyone who sends someone to a lefty web site to find out where America is heading has got to be as whacked out as Sheen. Hey #47 LLLaughable, I’m insulted that you only included Texas Bob in your cursings. Please include me next time, or I’ll be offended.
- Lefty, quit attacking the people here. I am tired of you picking fights with people. Your ignorance on matters concerning American culture and the War on Terror has been revealed over and over again, yet you just keep on saying the same things. All you are doing is irritating everyone. Stop it.Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 03 26 at 09:10 PM • permalink
- #42 “Bush’s puny poll numbers are emboldening those who find his constant lies just too hard to swallow anymore.”
You seem to know as little about the USA public as your idiot friend, the LaLaLa. First on the “lies” lie. The only lies about the I am aware that can be documented and verified are those in the NYSlime (look at the corrections pages of just the last two weeks), Newsweek (Koran toilet lie), etc. If you’re referring to the canard that he declared that we went to war over the WMD, get someone who can read English to help you go over his speeches and you’ll find that you’ve bought into Lefty Lies. As for polls, they were low for Bush before his last sweepin elections. Almost everyone in the USA who is not brain dead knows that the present system by the MSM is to weight the responses of Democrats higher than Repubs. That’s why when elections come along, the polls flop. (Google the pre-election poll headlines of the NYSlime and you will find they are consistently pessimistic about the re-lection of Bush.) Moreover, when do poll numbers need to embolden the looney left from attacking Bush and enabling crackpots like Sheen to spout off, or you? As for feeling abandoned, I can tell you must feel you’re astute at psychology. Finally, you’re snide remark about this post bringing out the worst in us. I would not agree with you about what the worst is after reading the vicious potty mouthed vomit found on lefty blogs.
- Hey, David Corn just went on Fox to defend Charlie Sheen for speaking truth to our flyover state power…Posted by richard mcenroe on 2006 03 26 at 09:13 PM • permalink
- Andrea, so you’re obviously okay with people like Texican Bog referring (completely off topic) to someone’s mother as a seacow? Yes?
———————————
Best Charlie Sheen dope-freak moment ever :
A media screening of some trash Sheen/Chris Farley movie in the early ‘90s. The journos move up on Sheen in the screening room, start asking questions about the movie, Sheen cuts them off with this : (paraphrased) “Look, I know why you guys are here. You just want to hear about the hookers and the drugs.”
Journos nod their heads, Sheen smiles, sniffs back massive coke booger. And it was shown on Entertainment Tonight. Classic.
The freaky thing about what Sheen is up to now is that he is supposedly off the drugs, hooker and booze. (cue Twlight Zone theme music) Beware reformed hooker-drug freaks, they may actually be more dangerous straight.
Posted by LeftieLatteLover on 2006 03 26 at 09:35 PM • permalink
- Oh no. Someone brought up facts. What on earth can the facts of reality have to do with Mr. Sheen, and his millions of…followers? How can anyone think they can answer Mr. Sheen and him Millions? If there are millions of people that think something, it must be something that we must give the precious minutes of our lives over to considering these millions and what they think (using the term loosely). The fact that engineers might consider the laws of physics when they design a building, well…what does that have to do with anything. So what if actual buildings in reality don’t fall over like cartoon buildings because somebody might know what they’re doing and, having followed the laws of physics, control how a building might fall. Who the hell are engineers and architects anyway. I bet they don’t have millions of minions visiting their web sites!
LLL: So tell me how 200,000 discrete visits a day multiplies into millions. Do you think that maybe those same 200,000 people might visit more than one site in a day? What difference does it make if there are 200,000 people who spend their time visiting these sites, or 1 million, or millions? Do numbers mean that reality will change and what they think will retroactively become true? What is the cutoff point that determines the truth or falsehood of some fact? And do you think that there must be big bucks involved, as some kind of defining characteristic of an idea’s truth or falsehood, if someone like Charlie Sheen stands up and makes an ass out of himself?
Why are you wasting your time on something like this? Have you not yet learned that there is a difference, in reality, between what people think and the facts of reality? Any number of people once believed the earth was flat. No matter how deeply they held this view, it didn’t make the earth flat. Numbers do not matter. So what if they believe something false? What am I supposed to do about that? Why am I supposed to care enough to give my attention to such people? Their false notions will do nothing to change reality.
There is too much to do in life that is worthwhile. Spending any more time than it takes to laugh at those who show their ignorance and then dares me to take them seriously, wastes my valuable time.
- Stats, answers to ‘uncomfortable’ qustions :
Yes I did get the Coulter quote wrong, but I did take it from a Fox News transcript, so…
Here’s Coulter’s correct quote : “We should invade their countries, KILL THEIR LEADERS and convert them to Christianity….We carpet
-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That’s war. And this is war.”Where’s your evidence there will be a War On Iran? So far it’s just talk, and Russia and China are telling the US and Israel to pull their heads in, along with US generals. Check UN transcripts if you doubt this at all.
I could tell you why I was in the US from July to October, 2001, but my ‘Bat Leveyha’ would have to take your balls (LOL!).
And if you’re not interested in what a small number of WTC rescue workers thought about what happened on 9/11, then that’s your problem, not mine. I heard what I heard, never said I believed any of it, still don’t.
Don’t exactly see your point about people buying 9/11 conspiracy crap not also being able to be Bush voters, but…whatever.
And, Stats, if you really think most Australian Muslim teenagers want to live by Sharia law then you really need to go and see how most of them live their lives today. They would bomb mullahs to STOP them taking away their iPods and designer low riders.
Yesterday is not tomorrow, you really should have some faith in the change that comes with new generations growing up in wonderful, tolerant countries like Australia. Old hate dies slow, but it does die eventually. People get sick of fighting and killing and hating…well, some do anyway.
Posted by LeftieLatteLover on 2006 03 26 at 10:18 PM • permalink
- 58I heard what I heard
Get your ears cleaned out, or people will think you’re a liar instead of deaf.
Don’t exactly see your point about people buying 9/11 conspiracy crap not also being able to be Bush voters
You mean that Americans who believe that Bush was behind 9/11 would still vote for Bush? Geez, you’re as whacked out as Sheen. No, I’m wrong, even Sheen would not believe that even in the coma he resides in.
- You’re lost in your own delusions, stats, and now you’re trying to feed in a line about Bush being responsible for 9/11, which is not claimed nor quoted nor said anywhere in the above posts. What is your evidence for such an absurd claim? Are you a Sheen-blame-Bush plant or something? Fess up, you’ve been outed!Posted by LeftieLatteLover on 2006 03 26 at 10:39 PM • permalink
- #58 You make a pretense of answering my questions but you haven’t answered either one. You didn’t answer How come, with all those millions spending their cash on that conspiracy crap did Bush and the Republicans win the election overwhelmingly Good try, refused to answer by pretending not to understand the question. O.K., maybe not a pretense, perhaps you’re just plain dim.
You refused to answerwhat is a teen-ager doing flying around the world in September? Whose payroll are you on, anyway? That’s OK. I wouldn’t want to embarrass your sponsers by having you reveal that you are associated with them.
You can’t stop misrepresenting other peoples comments. Ah, the plastic straw man, a cheap rhetorical trick that makes the user appear an idiot. Where does your remark “Stats, if you really think most Australian Muslim teenagers want to live by Sharia law then you really need to go and see how most of them live…” come from, the thin air that you pretend to breath? But I should have expected such behavior. Raise the straw man that no one ever evoked but falsely attribute it to another and then knock it down with a few (unsupported) statements. I must still agree with Texas Bob in all that he has said. Curse away.
- Andrea –
Can you help me out here, you see Tim runs a blog and then he provides a comments section so that people can, you know, comment. From what you appear to be saying it would seem that you don’t want a comment section to be free and frank discussion but some sort of echo chamber where we all agree with each other and congratulate ourselves on how clever we all are. Is that it? Because I would hate to fall foul of the rules and say something that Texasbob didn’t agree with and get myself banned.
I don’t happen to agree with LLL’s viewpoint but that’s irrelevant he’s provided some useful and moderately interesting leads on an issue that I might or might not follow up later, however because TexasBob has decided that he doesn’t like this issue and he personally insults LLL in the process you come along and warn LLL that he might bet chucked out!
So just for the record can TexasBob please publish the list of subjects that may not be discussed here on pain of vicious personal insult from him in the first case and being banned by you in the second place?
Posted by Harry Flashman on 2006 03 26 at 10:56 PM • permalink
- #62, F-A-N-T-A-S-Y-L-A-N-D. Enjoy the rest of your one way conversation.Posted by LeftieLatteLover on 2006 03 26 at 10:58 PM • permalink
- #60 I know it’s hopeless to try to explain to you but here’s the issue. If the conspiracy theorists are correct, then clearly Bush lied about Osama being behind 9/11. And if the Americans believed that, why would they re-elect him overwhelmingly?
Just in case you don’t get it, this time the question is a rhetorical one. It is meant to illustrate that no matter how many hits are made on conspiracy blogs or purchases made of conspiracy literature, as far as measuring US public opinion, those stats are meaningless. I’m afraid you have again been outed as a grotesque clown. Well, here comes my LaLaLeftoid escape vehicle. Got to return to planet Earth from the Leftoid swamps.
- #64 Caught me on the way out. Still up to your old ways. Refusal to answer a direct question. Either pretend not to understand the question or answer a question not asked. Your response to the question#62 is typical of your clownish behavior F-A-N-T-A-S-Y-L-A-N-D. Enjoy the rest of your one way conversation.
- Harry Flashman — Can you publish a list of the reasons establishing a comments section implies the unquestioning acceptance of arguments long refuted, wearisome assumptions of moral superiority by the wholly undeserving, and the spineless tolerance of repetitious trolling by people with no real interest in an honest dialogue?Posted by richard mcenroe on 2006 03 26 at 11:32 PM • permalink
- Well Richard there isn’t such a list my friend because no one is calling for “unquestioned acceptance of arguments” are they?
No I am merely pointing out that by all means disagree with LLL if you wish but I rather resent the administrator sticking her nose into a perfectly ordinary discussion and threatening only one of the participants because she happened to disagree with the point of view of that participant.
I seem to recall a month or so back Tim made a courageous decision to publish the Mo-toons, he did so on the basis that free speech meant allowing people to hear things that they might not like. If we only allow the expression of ideas that we agree with, which appears to be Andrea’s position then it’s hardly free speech is it?
If you don’t like LLL’s viewpoint (which in all honesty is hardly offensive, he’s merely pointing out that there are a lot of nutjobs out there who believe in 9/11 conspiracies, what’s wrong with doing that for heaven’s sake?) then feel free to debate him or ignore him as you see fit. I don’t think censoring a contrary viewpoint is Andrea’s job is it?
Posted by Harry Flashman on 2006 03 26 at 11:42 PM • permalink
- Harry – the door might be open, but you’re a guest in this house as are we all. And yes, we do share a certain mindset here. That’s why we hang around.
I don’t visit to immerse myself in the drivel of leftoids. Why would I, when I can get that just by opening a newspaper or tuning in to the ABC? Tim established this blog as a place where the real alternative viewpoints are easily accessible. And for that, we all give thanks.
I really doubt that any of the trolls who’ve been banned had the slightest interest in putting an ‘alternative’ view. They come here intending to be thrown out, and sooner or later they get their wish. It’s a mark of honour in some circles, I suppose: “Andrea banned me too!” Like running through the girls toilet at primary school. How transgressive.Posted by SwinishCapitalist on 2006 03 26 at 11:55 PM • permalink
- Stats wants to know why Americans voted Bush back into office in 2004. Well guess what Stats, I have spent many a sleepless night trying to figure that one out myself.
We have tons of theories. Diebold voting machines stealing votes, disenfranchised black voters in Ohio, the list goes on and on. I don’t know if it was any of these or a combination of these. What I do know is that if the election were held today George Bush could not be elected dog catcher in Topeka, Kansas.
The mood has changed. We are more informed. Americans are starting to wake up and smell the BS. And they don’t like it!
But what I cannot understand is where the Tim Blair crowd comes from? Who are you people? Why are you so determined to defend this war? I know that you are not all Australians, but for those who are you are clearly in the minority in your own country. 65% of your countrymen want out of Iraq by May.
Do you come here to circle the wagons and desperately try to fend off the growing disillusionment with this conflict? I know it must be much easier for you to puff up your chests and feel all manly by supporting the killing of these people. I mean you have a handful of soldiers over there and have only suffered one casualty. And he died in a car accident! I mean if America is the circus, then Australia is just the guy following the elephant with the shovel. You are not even part of the equation.
I guess for us the consequences have been more dire. We have lost 2,322 Americans and have spent multiple billions of dollars to fund this nightmare. We have seen very necessary programs suffer due to lack of funds, including veterans benefits. And then when Katrina hit, our government found that it had spent so many resources invading another country that it could not rescue its own.
Why did we allow Bush a secoond term? I have a feeling that there are millions of people all over my country asking themselves that very question.
- LLL – sitting up all night drinking coffee and researching conspiracies is not good for your mental health, if you have any left.
But if these millions of people are out there buying videos (why not DVDs – or is that part of the conspiracy too) and books where are the Truth millionaires, making the bucks off the millions?
Maybe they just syphon the money into the Montana Militia. Oops I’ve said too much.Posted by The (WHMECDM) President on 2006 03 27 at 12:25 AM • permalink
- Fine swinishcapitalist but I really fail to see the problem with LLL’s post, I mean he says there are many nutjobs out there who believe in 9/11 conspiracies, so why is everyone getting their knickers in a twist? There are a lot of nutters out there, so what’s the problem with pointing this fact out, that’s what I don’t get.Posted by Harry Flashman on 2006 03 27 at 12:29 AM • permalink
- Gryphen
I also think that everyone else thinks whatever I think. I wake up at night thinking, why do we continue to put up with rindless bacon? Most Americans agree it is an abomination, but why did we let it happen? Why, because like many people that hang out here, they are morally if not intellectually inferior – some could even be black people.
I left out a personal pro-noun in the last sentence, but I know everyone will agree with me when I say my, my, my.
Posted by Margos Maid on 2006 03 27 at 12:35 AM • permalink
- Rereading L3’s post at #11, Harry, it’s kind of hard to know what he’s saying. The drift towards the end appears to be that Charlie speaks for a lot of people, and that alone is enough to give him credibility. But as subsequent posts pointed out, there’s an awful lot of static in his tranmission.
A degree of coherence is always appreciated. Leftie comes on like he’s just downed a fistful of speed – maybe with an LSD chaser.Posted by SwinishCapitalist on 2006 03 27 at 01:03 AM • permalink
- Here, Gryphen, I’ll make it easy for you: we are cruel people who smile at the thought of babies getting blown to bits by aircraft bombardment, and the thought of our soldiers dying in droves makes us feel all funny in the pants. And we also believe a day without making a pile of naked Iraqi prisoners is like a day without sunshine. Also, we need to keep the oil vats in our back yards nice and full, for drowning innocent Muslim puppies in. No wait—make that innocent Muslim harp seals. (Yes, the real reason for the harp seal hunt can be revealed: it is well known that all harp seals converted to Islam, the Religion of Peace™, decades ago, and we have to keep them from breeding.)Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 03 27 at 01:37 AM • permalink
- Well, that’s our Andrea!
Emma Peel with a keyboard – that’s how I see her in myfeverish erotic fantasiesimagination.Posted by SwinishCapitalist on 2006 03 27 at 01:44 AM • permalink
- Oy! Gevalt! a Yeshiva Bocher?
I could tell you why I was in the US from July to October, 2001, but my ‘Bat Leveyha’ would have to take your balls (LOL!).
LLL, you complete and utter twat—that’s it, tipesh, yer outta the Club—go find a font and dive in.
Lech l’kibaynee mat, azay putz ata!
Posted by MentalFloss on 2006 03 27 at 02:03 AM • permalink
- Latte you have proved my point. I said you’d side-step, and you did (albeit I did bait you a bit with regards to your genetic heritage). You have still offered no proof to your claim that MILLIONS of Americans believe as you say. You’ve ranted, you’ve feigned outrage, you retaliated, but in true leftiod fashion, you have offered NOTHING. How typical. Vomit. You just keep spreading it around. Clean up the mess Latte. Tell the truth. YOU CAN’T BACK UP WHAT YOU SAY! I expected more from manatee boy.
PS: Don’t hate. Be proud of your heritage!
- Sorry, I really should read everything before I post.
#72 Harry, LLL habitually comes here posting wild statements claiming them as fact. I routinely ask him to back up what he claims. He never does. This time its his claim of MILLIONS of Americans believe yada yada yada, blah, blah, blah.
Since you are rallying to defend this behavior, you are obviously tilted to the port side.
The discussion is about presenting facts. LLL and now you, avoid, deflect, and change the subject when cornered and your hand is called. Either back up what you wildly claim, or shut up. How hard is that to understand?
- LLL – You’re as confused as a blind lesbian in a fish shop.
If viewing a web site, watching a video or reading a book confirms a belief system, then a surprisingly large number of people should not be allowed to own pets.
Ever considered that people viewing the conspiracy sites might just be taking a look at the enemy?
Posted by Infidel Tiger on 2006 03 27 at 03:47 AM • permalink
- Taxus Blurb, I spent three minutes looking around to find the information I needed to make my point many posts ago, and again, if you don’t believe I couldn’t care less.
You seem to have spent far longer than me dwelling in the dark worlds of these no lives.
Give it up, Bob, or join Charlie Sheen’s 9/11 Truth Bus. You’ve milked this thread far enough with your absurd ranting and demands of proof, whatever you deem that to be. You coul have a three million strong list of names of Americans who don’t believe the official story is the full story and you would still call it a fraud. So what’s the point of going on? No One Cares. You win, yah, yah, yah. Move On.
Posted by LeftieLatteLover on 2006 03 27 at 06:36 AM • permalink
- #LeftyManateeBoy. Proof. Yeah, who needs it, right? Thank You. That’s all I wanted. For you to admit you are a lying, posing (and evidently mutated), shit stirrer. You’ve accomplished the 1st step of admitting the problem. The 2nd is for you to shut the fuck up now and in the future.
Great job. Sea cows everywhere salute you (as I am right now – you can imagine) for this bold new step.
- It may be possible to sneer and make clever comments about a persons personal habits, but the point Sheen makes is quite accurate.
There is a large body of evidence which is actually very difficult to refute, which taken piece meal is startling and provocative.
Taken together, it is positively frightening.
As he/she seems to have the most to say in this thread (none of it really pleasant), I would put 6 questions to Toxic Bob..
1)Where did the plane that “hit” the Pentagon go?? Where were the bits of it, like, for instance, those 2 big jet engines?
2) What was the flash just before impact with the towers?
3) What is the temperature required to degrade sturctural steel?
4) What is the temperature of an “avgas” fire, in AIR?
5) Why were pools of melted steel found?
6) Please provide the details of any other similarly constructed high rise buildings that have collapsed, so quickly and completely following an upper story fire
- #87, Watch out, Texas Blurt will start making derogatory comments about your mother as well.
I tried to explain to Blurt that rescue workers on the WTC site three and a bit weeks after the attacks were not sure about the official story (not that they blamed Bush, that’s a thread injection), or what they were then being told was the official version.
And that’s some workers, seven or eight that I heard talking, and talked to, as they stood around outside the site and swore at tourist taking photographs.
Sheen has hooked himself onto the collapse of WTC 7 as being evidence of something not right about the official story. The 9/11 Commission report didn’t mention that building’s collapse at all. I read the thing, and for a clinical report it was actually very well written. The few sites I looked at yesterday seem to be using the (apparent) unexplained collapse of WTC 7 as a main arguing point as well. Someone left this lying around unexplained and now the 9/11 Truthers are feasting on it.
Perhaps the proof that nothing is wrong with the official version is the fact (yes, Blurt, fact) that Oliver Stone has made a film about the 9/11 rescue workers digging for their friends and isn’t going anywhere near the conspiracy theories.
From the Google searches I just did there have been only three steel and glass skyscrapers that have ever collapsed from fire damage, WTC 1, WTC 2 and WTC 7. And yes, the 9/11 Commission Report states very clearly the collapse of WTC 1 and WTC 2 was due to fires melting isulation around key points in the steel frames. But no mention of WTC 7. There may have been other buildings that have collapsed in this way, but that information isn’t archived on Google from what I could see.
Meanwhile Sheen has scored himself a few hundred mentions in the US media in the last week alone (according to a ‘Charlie Sheen’ Google News search). He is being both rightly mocked and taken seriously, bizarre. If he did it for attention, it sure worked a treat.
If flaming ensues, please leave my mother out of it, she was harpooned by Japanese whalers by mistake last week, very sad story, don’t want to talk about it.
Posted by LeftieLatteLover on 2006 03 27 at 10:14 AM • permalink
- #72 I really fail to see the problem with LLL’s post, I mean he says there are many nutjobs out there who believe in 9/11 conspiracies, so why is everyone getting their knickers in a twist?
Because he’s doing much more than that. And once again, a thread gets turned into a self-righteous crusade that’s all about LLL instead of the topic on hand.
- #91, people like your good self, Stats and Texas Blurt turned this thread into something else other than Sheen and whackjob 9/11 conspiracy theorists by not engaging in the conversation at hand, just lobbing in with your own conspiracy theories.
If you’ve got nothing to contribute to the conversation, why are you still hanging around on this thread? Self-righteous policing duties?
Posted by LeftieLatteLover on 2006 03 27 at 10:53 AM • permalink
- #87 Dreyfuze, why on earth would I want to do that? Did I make any claim that would warrant any such explanation? Is that your answer for LMB’s wild claim, to ask me a question? I asked for something substantive to backup the wild claims of a leftist (much like you). Nothing but shit was given (which includes your moore’ish claim about 9/11)
- Goodnight, Blurty. See you on another thread no doubt, where you will continue to try and distract all from any kind of real conversation about the threat topic, no doubt, by harping in on just one factoid, no doubt, and will dogwhistle away about how no one dareth answer your questions, no doubt. Take Andrea’s advice, go and do your own research, you might be surprised at what you find out. No doubt.Posted by LeftieLatteLover on 2006 03 27 at 11:13 AM • permalink
- Sigh-Popular Mechanics debunked most of the absurd conspiracy claims made about 9/11 last year. You can go to this link to see for yourselves. It addresses the issue of WTC #7 raised by triple L and answers several of the questions put forward by Dreyfuze.
Please note, they consulted over 300 experts and eyewitnesses in their research. Let the conspiracy nuts dispute them if they can.
- #92, actually I thought I was making my contribution by pointing out how you continually hijack threads and start arguments. The latest thread quoting Mark Steyn is a case in point. But, as usual, you dodge the obvious.
But I’m tired of you now, so I won’t bother you anymore. You’re a lefty moonbat, despite your claims otherwise, so there’s no point in trying to reason with you. It’s enough that you know we’re on to you, even as you continue to clamor for the attention.
- #96, thanks for the Popular Mechanics link, haven’t seen that yet, looks very interesting, more detailed than that New York Magazine piece which was mostly on the Sheen-crowd.
#97, you’re beyond paranoid, RebeccaH, but whatever gets you going. Hope your life really isn’t that boring.
Posted by LeftieLatteLover on 2006 03 27 at 12:31 PM • permalink
- ANDREA, #63 has opened up comments on comments. He assumes that all commentators have the same interest in objectively treating the facts. He ignores that some, like LLL, have no such interest at all. He is right in contending that this is no reason for insult. He fails to note that LLL has indulged in unprovoked and gratuitous insults, has in fact provoked them to a great degree. In such a case, the writer deserves insult for no other reason that he has violated the norms of decent communication. Let me give just one example out of a plethora of LLL’s inanities, one of the shorter ones and least offensive to save space. Half joking in the “Gaza” post I stated that “Soon the only safe places a family can take a stroll in the evening will be in Tel Aviv and other cities in Israel.” This is his response in his next post:“Stats, spread the Fear.If this info is in the Melbourne edition of Pravda, then are you trying to say it’’s state-based propaganda? When it was just Jilly Courtney it was a mere alleged ‘‘bombing’’, now she appears to be a Muslim-convert expect it to become a ‘‘terror campaign’’. Hmmm, balance.”
With all due respect to #63, I think he might notice I did not refer to LLL at all in my post. Nevertheless, LLL could not refrain from taking his malicious but childish jab, a demented, insulting accusation that I’m “spreading the fear”. (Certainly absurd in the face of the fact that Muslims all over the world are doing a real job of spreading not only fear but death and destruction.) The rest of his response is mystifying in light of my remark. (Reading his previous remark in the Post he was claiming there was no evidence that Jill Courtney was associated with Muslims. In his anxiety to press his lefty style cover up of Muslim crimes, he failed, as usual to find the facts, and so he was once again wrong, assuming he wasn’t lying to begin with.) To find more serious gratuitous insults of serious people, #63 should read his past posts or simply wait around. LLL can’t help himself. But he sure can whine.
- #70, Another troll who can’t read English. My questioon Gryphen was: “How come, with all those millions spending their cash on that conspiracy crap did Bush and the Republicans win the election overwhelmingly?” And here is the LLL leftoid trick in operation. Don’t answer the question. pretend not to understand it or pretend to answer it by answering a different question: Here’s the Gr. opening response: “Stats wants to know why Americans voted Bush back into office in 2004.” No, I know why they voted hims back into office, to keep moonbats like you out of power. But I see that you can’t even answer your own question, even after many a sleepless night effort. And yet you have the audacity to tell us how Americans think and to predict the next elections. (Youv’e dreamed up a load of crap theories, including election fraud, but the only ones convicted of interfering in that election were members of the Democratic Party.Go back to sleep.)
Oh geez, there’s ShortFuze doing his impression of a lobotomised lefty again.
PW, what d’ya mean, “…doing his impression…”? Dreckfull has a genuine lobotomy.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 03 27 at 06:25 PM • permalink
We use ‘controlled demolition’ to control not the fall, but the potential spray of detritus.
JorgX is quite right. If you’ve ever heard this topic discussed by a member of the Loizeaux family, probably the foremost controlled demolition experts on the planet, you know that explosives are but the catalyst to remove load bearing walls and determine the direction of the fall. Gravity brings the building down. They use the least amount of explosives possible because they are trying to “control” the dust and flying debris. If you ever witness a Controlled Demolition operation, you will be flat-out amazed by the lack of dust. Who could possibly look at the collapse of those towers and the immediate aftermath and consider it “controlled”?
Posted by Kyda Sylvester on 2006 03 27 at 06:37 PM • permalink
- As I recall, the whole trick is in the timing of the explosions. It’s the one piece of information never shared.Posted by Kyda Sylvester on 2006 03 27 at 06:43 PM • permalink
- Tim’s “Cindy Sheen” reminds me of a Captains Quarters commenter who said that Sheen is just Sheehan without the “ha”.Posted by Kyda Sylvester on 2006 03 27 at 07:09 PM • permalink
- Toxic Bub, I will answer a couple of my questions for you, as it is obviously more pressing for you to heap abuse on people than actually contribute in a reasonable way..
(http://www.911review.com/coverup/fantasy/melting.html)
1500deg C Structural Steel Melts.
825deg C Max temp of burning avgas, in AIR.
I assume that these figures are accurate.
Perhaps you know otherwise??So, how did the steel melt??
Remember, in your answer (if any) you are NOT allowed to invoke any as yet undiscovered laws of nature, physics or the rabbiting right.Good point about the dust (perhaps) Has such a huge building ever been brought down by controlled demolition before?
Who knows how the sheer mass of material disintegrating and perhaps the type of material and nature of construction, would contribute to the debris.
- Dreyfuze — this is probably a waste of time, but whutdafuk, everyone else has tried…
Wood burns at around 500° F (Bradbury got it wrong), yet wildfires in California, with which I have personal experience, can reach 2500° F; not merely hot enough to melt steel but to set lighter metals like aluminum burning. The factors are amount of fuel, and area of flame, and duration of combustion.
So you have a intense fire in a contained space, feeding off its own fuel and the very contents of the damaged structure. Yes, that can and will cause a catastrophic structural failure.
Posted by richard mcenroe on 2006 03 28 at 01:09 AM • permalink
- Taxing Bab..And where DID those airplane bits go??
You see the problem here??
The original story was a rather large plane flown, very skillfully by the way, at high speed, into the heavily reinforced pentagon. After skidding across the lawn.
Somehow the fragile nose has penetrated the building, the entire plane has liquidised and followed.
This is the (utterly ludicrous and laughable were it not coming from an elected government..) explanation for the almost complete lack of any Boeing bits..
Oh, don’t forget that pristine lawn.
The exit hole, inside the building, through many layers of really thick concrete, is just so neat, small and well formed..
There is also a great deal less fire damage for all those tons of avgas that should have burned for a few hours..Do you understand why some people are increasingly sceptical of the official line. It does not stands up to even the most superficial of glances.
You can curse and bluster as is your odd way but you can’t change the laws of nature. And that is what you are up against,
- 107.. Thanks for that. Useful information is NEVER wasted, it is just rarely offered on this site.
Do you think it might make a difference wether the heat is transfered by radiation or conduction? I know that many bushfire spread by radiant heat, where a neighbouring, isolated/insulated object receives a continuous input of thermal energy and yes, it will contine to heat up to an equilibrium point. Or burst into flames..
But this particular phenomenon has never been seen before in steel framed building fires, (has it??). Which is probably quite a different dynamic.
Bradbury was talking about paper, by the way.
Not “volatile” filled wood.
Any stuctural engineers like to give a helpful opinion?
- Dreyfuze Sheen. Are you sleeping with the manatee boy, or least sharing a crack pipe?
I asked for the mutant to offer some proof of his wild claims of millions (a minimum of 2 million – get it?) of Americans believe the same mental diarrhea that you are now spewing. I do not know the flash point of titanium, nor is it relevant to my question. Stick to the point. I really don’t believe you can. Try Ritalin.
- Tuxass Bib..Maybe the number(s) can not be presently supported. How many other “hypotheses” on this site do you think fall into a similar situation?
At least he/she is not some bandwidth drone trying to be as personally abusive as possible (anonymously of course) and for no good reason.
Such proof as you demand of others is as relevant to the general discussion as your offerings are useful.
Look up Hypocrite in your “Tourette Techniques” weekly.
- Dreyfuze — You have now officially qualified as a waste of your daddy’s sperm.
I just finished a post, which you acknowledged, where I said the fire was hot enough to burn aluminum, and you nevertheless ask “where did the pieces go?”
And you express surprise that a fully loaded airliner (which can weigh in excess of 400,000 lbs), traveling at several hundred miles an hour, can break through a building wall?
So you don’t under stand basic chemistry.
You don’t understand basic physics.
You don’t understand basic common sense.
You don’t understand basic English.Either that, or you have confirmed my long-standing belief that there is no such thing as a lefty capable of honest dialog. Your pick.
Posted by richard mcenroe on 2006 03 28 at 03:27 AM • permalink
- Dreyfuze, go back a couple of weeks and check the links to Popular Mechanics. An extended article there will answer your questions.Posted by SwinishCapitalist on 2006 03 28 at 04:32 AM • permalink
- Looking back over this thread, LLL’s performance reminds me very much of Howard Dean’s attempt to give credibility to nutcase 9/11 theories a few years ago…you know, the whole wink-wink, nudge-nudge “There are many theories about it. The most interesting theory that I’ve heard so far—which is nothing more than a theory, it can’t be proved …” thing. Maintain plausible deniability while keeping the nutters in the limelight.
The fact that Dreyfuze decided to present the full monty (so to speak) just completes the picture.
- Put an aluminium can in a campfire. Wait 8 hours and pick it up. Fuck all left.
Lesson ends.Posted by thefrollickingmole on 2006 03 28 at 05:46 AM • permalink
- #115, yeah PW, Tim B must be in on it, too, seeing as he posted the bloody story in the first place. Unbelievable. Must be nice to be able to watch everything you see on the news or hear roll from a politicians’ lips and believe it, never doubting, never questioning anything.
The only thing I thought was weird about 9/11 was why the WTC 7 collapsed, but now I’ve read through the Popular Mechanics story debunking of the conspiracy theories, I’ve learned the reasons why it happened.
I actually thought some of you would have been interested in some background as to why Charlie Sheen got such a huge reaction to his comments in the US. Forgive me for sharing what I learned that helped to explain why some in the US took him so seriously. I’ll know next time to not bother contributing to what I thought was supposed to be an exchange of opinion and information, because it seems to now mostly be a forum for loony extremist paranoid bile-spew about peoples’ mothers.
Posted by LeftieLatteLover on 2006 03 28 at 08:24 AM • permalink
- Childish name calling and attempting to ridicule those you dont agree with apart..
113..
Max TakeOff Weigh of a 757…272,500 lb.
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/757family/pf/pf_300back.html
Suggest before you start name calling, impuning others integrity, assigning curious genetic problems to others and general twat like behaviour, you do a little data checking. That apart, the kinetic energy is still pretty high.. High enough to shred the entire plane and contents (all 272,500 lbs of it), including 2 X 6 ton engines, into unrecognisable bits.
Note… I do not think this phenomenon has actually be observed previously.. It was just a “neo-law of physics” plucked out of the air and presented authoritatively even though plainly fallacious. Curiously though, the black box survived this ordeal completely intact..
And all this highly capable low level flying was done by somebody who couldn’t fly a Cessna…
And then there are the missing frames from the Gate House video and the complete absence (removed) of the film from the garage over the road. All images that would have shown a 757 going into the Pentagon.. Or not, as the case may be.
114.. I read that review. Now read this..
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pm/
116.. NEWS FLASH Jet engines do not melt.. Do they?? I must look next time I fly.
Some interesting work on the physics and dynamsic of the event.
http://webfairy.org/holmgren/10.htmlIt is interesting that the party line is that the good ‘ol government (that has never been known for its dishonesty) has again, been totally honest.
However, the fact that a large number of people have taken the time to analyse what they have been presented with, would suggest that the official version is not as water tight as you would expect it to be.
There are many glaring inconsistancies that cry out for attention.
- Dreyfuze-If you would bother to go and look at the Popular Mechanics article I linked you would see pictures of the Pentagon on 9/11 with debris from the jet clearly visible. You are free to reject them as faked if you wish, but I doubt if you would ever see them debunked on the conspiracy nut websites.
- 91B30 — Don’t forget every television network in NYC has to be in on it, since they showed the second impact at the WTC live.Posted by richard mcenroe on 2006 03 28 at 11:15 AM • permalink
- LLL 21
do you really think those tens of thousands of websites, the hundreds of thousands of downloads of 9/11 conspiracy movies on Google Video, all those book sales, all those CNN and other media polls claiming 60-80% of people think the government is hiding something….do you think all those numbers come from just a few thousand true believers in a 9/11 conspiracy?
I sure do think that. I think Texas Bob thinks that too.
Texas Bob 24
You send three links to nutjob websites and that proves MILLIONS of Americans believe what LLL, and now you, claim?
It looks to me like you (Texas Bob) are saying that LLL is claiming that those hypothetical millions of Ameridiots are correct in their conspiranoid kookery. But I’ve read through this thread pretty carefully and I’m pretty sure he’s not saying that. He’s also not defending Sheen’s personal idiocy, in the ad populum manner you suggest.
He IS, however, being pretty damn ambiguous about what he actually is saying, probably just to piss you off. It seems to be working. This sort of tactic has been used on me, from time to time, with discouraging results. Don’t let him bait you into saying anything dumb, is alls I’m sane.Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 03 28 at 11:40 AM • permalink
- LLL 30
Bob, if you are unable to do your own Google searches to see just how much stuff is out there on this subject, then let me babysit you through some of this process.
Dishonest crap like this is what makes me think that Texas Bob has the right side of this argument, despite my text-parsing exercise above. TB hasn’t called for a demonstration of “how much stuff” is getting circulated; he has called, explicitly and at least twice, for substantiation of the number of believers OF the stuff. And instead of providing that, LLL just shows more stuff. So we’re expected to buy the inference that, because there’s a lot of stuff, it takes a lot of people to keep it in circulation. But with this here interweb thingy going on, it really doesn’t.
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 03 28 at 11:52 AM • permalink
- Harry Flashman 68
If you don’t like LLL’s viewpoint (which in all honesty is hardly offensive, he’s merely pointing out that there are a lot of nutjobs out there who believe in 9/11 conspiracies, what’s wrong with doing that for heaven’s sake?) then feel free to debate him or ignore him as you see fit. I don’t think censoring a contrary viewpoint is Andrea’s job is it?
In all fairness, I do see where T.B. was calling L.L.L.‘s mama a manatee, and I don’t see where L.L.L. was reciprocating in kind, yet the one to get threatened with banning was L.L.L., which kind of offends my sense of fairness. Just like that last run-on sentence might offend anybody’s sense of grammar. But at a slightly deeper level, I do think L.L.L. was “asking for it,” i.e. that he got exactly the kind of reaction he was hoping to provoke.
But it all boils down to the data. There either is or is not some reliable polling or survey data out there which gives some kind of reliable estimate of How Many People actually believe Sheen’s Conspiracy Story. And when pressed for that data, L.L.L. consistently presents everything BUT that data, plus implies that the data demanders are being deliberately obtuse.
So yeah, he’s gotten treated unfairly, but he kind of deserves to get treated unfairly, if that’s not too oxymoronic a statement. But I’ve belabored this point to the point of boring even myself, and I haven’t yet even started IN on Dreyfuze’s “contributions.” Sorry about that.Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 03 28 at 12:19 PM • permalink
- I do see your point, Stoop, but it’s still hard to believe that all of this 9/11 conspiracy media was generated, kept alive and continues to grow from the interest level of a few thousand people. The book sale numbers, the video download numbers, the message board posting numbers, even from a brief lookaround, are staggering.
I don’t think I ever said there are millions who believe in the conspiracies, just that there are millions who don’t believe the official story, and are looking into these alternate versions for themselves, and that is two very different things.
And despite what Texas Bob and others continue to infer, I don’t believe the conspiracy stuff. I just think there are valid questions that haven’t been answered, like the WTC rescue workers I heard talking at the site in early October, 2001.
I do believe that terrible mistakes were made and good intelligence was ignored. But bureaucrats and paper pushers fucking up doesn’t mean there was a legitimate government conspiracy behind the events of that day.
9/11 Denial, if it can be called that, is a big industry in the US, and Europe, and a lot of people are making a lot of money off it. And with Sheen blatting on it is likely to grow only larger in the months and years to come.
Posted by LeftieLatteLover on 2006 03 28 at 12:30 PM • permalink
- 87 Along comes Drefuze to ACTUALLY present the bullshit that LLL has been getting accused of presenting. In a way, it’s a relief…
Drefuze
1)Where did the plane that “hit” the Pentagon go?? Where were the bits of it, like, for instance, those 2 big jet engines?
from Popular Mechanics’ debunking site
When American Airlines Flight 77 hit the Pentagon’s exterior wall, Ring E, it created a hole approximately 75 ft. wide, according to the ASCE Pentagon Building Performance Report. The exterior facade collapsed about 20 minutes after impact, but ASCE based its measurements of the original hole on the number of first-floor support columns that were destroyed or damaged. Computer simulations confirmed the findings.
Why wasn’t the hole as wide as a 757’s 124-ft.-10-in. wingspan? A crashing jet doesn’t punch a cartoon-like outline of itself into a reinforced concrete building, says ASCE team member Mete Sozen, a professor of structural engineering at Purdue University. In this case, one wing hit the ground; the other was sheared off by the force of the impact with the Pentagon’s load-bearing columns, explains Sozen, who specializes in the behavior of concrete buildings. What was left of the plane flowed into the structure in a state closer to a liquid than a solid mass. “If you expected the entire wing to cut into the building,” Sozen tells PM, “it didn’t happen.”
The tidy hole in Ring C was 12 ft. wide—not 16 ft. ASCE concludes it was made by the jet’s landing gear, not by the fuselage.Bottom line, the plane went “away,” as things do when they are INCINERATED.
Okay, your turn. Explain away the eyewitness testimony of the dozens of people who saw that 757 hit the Pentagon.Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 03 28 at 01:02 PM • permalink
- Drefuze 87.2
It may be possible to sneer and make clever comments about a persons personal habits
You are the last person in the world who would have a right to be taken seriously in making this complaint, you worthless bitch. Do you think nobody here has read your earlier contributions?
2) What was the flash just before impact with the towers?
“When the noses of the aircraft hit the buildings, you have a bright aluminum flash, the same as we saw at the Pentagon. That’s obvious to anyone familiar with physics, chemistry, and what happens when aluminum hits a structure at a high rate of speed.” And the proof of that analysis, the general points out, is in vonKleist’s own video. “If you watch just a few frames after the nose flash, you’ll see two smaller aluminum flashes as each engine strikes the building. That’s all it is.”
—Gen. Benton Partin, USAF, who also reminds me of a salient point I left out of my retort to your stupid question #1, to wit:
What the fuck is your alternative explanation for what happened to Flight 77? Because that aircraft and those people in it have definitely been missing since 9-11-01, and were not missing prior to that time.
Oh, also looping back to your question #1, here’s a witness whose testimony you’ll need to somehow impeach:Blast expert Allyn E. Kilsheimer was the first structural engineer to arrive at the Pentagon after the crash and helped coordinate the emergency response. “It was absolutely a plane, and I’ll tell you why,” says Kilsheimer, CEO of KCE Structural Engineers PC, Washington, D.C. “I saw the marks of the plane wing on the face of the building. I picked up parts of the plane with the airline markings on them. I held in my hand the tail section of the plane, and I found the black box.” Kilsheimer’s eyewitness account is backed up by photos of plane wreckage inside and outside the building. Kilsheimer adds: “I held parts of uniforms from crew members in my hands, including body parts. Okay?”
Good luck.
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 03 28 at 01:38 PM • permalink
- Dreyfuze 87.3 & 87.4 go together
3) What is the temperature required to degrade sturctural steel?
4) What is the temperature of an “avgas” fire, in AIR?Question 4 is phrased in a totally bullshit way, since the avgas wasn’t burning “in AIR,” it was burning inside an office building, along WITH everything in the building. But here’s the expert testimony you so haughtily demand:
Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F). However, experts agree that for the towers to collapse, their steel frames didn’t need to melt, they just had to lose some of their structural strength—and that required exposure to much less heat. “I have never seen melted steel in a building fire,” says retired New York deputy fire chief Vincent Dunn, author of The Collapse Of Burning Buildings: A Guide To Fireground Safety. “But I’ve seen a lot of twisted, warped, bent and sagging steel. What happens is that the steel tries to expand at both ends, but when it can no longer expand, it sags and the surrounding concrete cracks.”
“Steel loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100°F,” notes senior engineer Farid Alfawak-hiri of the American Institute of Steel Construction. “And at 1800° it is probably at less than 10 percent.” NIST also believes that a great deal of the spray-on fireproofing insulation was likely knocked off the steel beams that were in the path of the crashing jets, leaving the metal more vulnerable to the heat.
But jet fuel wasn’t the only thing burning, notes Forman Williams, a professor of engineering at the University of California, San Diego, and one of seven structural engineers and fire experts that PM consulted. He says that while the jet fuel was the catalyst for the WTC fires, the resulting inferno was intensified by the combustible material inside the buildings, including rugs, curtains, furniture and paper. NIST reports that pockets of fire hit 1832°F.
“The jet fuel was the ignition source,” Williams tells PM. “It burned for maybe 10 minutes, and [the towers] were still standing in 10 minutes. It was the rest of the stuff burning afterward that was responsible for the heat transfer that eventually brought them down.”Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 03 28 at 01:45 PM • permalink
- Dreyfuze 87.5 and 87.6
5) Why were pools of melted steel found?
How does the finding of pools of melted steel support YOUR version of events? Failing that, how does the finding of pools of melted steel discredit the official version of events?
6) Please provide the details of any other similarly constructed high rise buildings that have collapsed, so quickly and completely following an upper story fire
Yeah I’ll just reach into my database of the hundreds of cases of similarly constructed high rise buildings that have collapsed following upper story fires and … that’s odd. Turns out this kind of event is very rare. Tell ya what, Dreyfuze, if you’ve GOT some collapsing-building anecdotes, and if they’ve GOT some evidence in them that supports your version of events, suppose YOU dig them out and present them.
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 03 28 at 01:52 PM • permalink
- Drefuze 108
And where DID those airplane bits go??
You see the problem here??So a fire that’s hot enough to distort steel girders would NOT be hot enough to incinerate a mostly-aluminum aircraft?
The original story was a rather large plane flown, very skillfully by the way, at high speed, into the heavily reinforced pentagon. After skidding across the lawn.
Somehow the fragile nose has penetrated the building, the entire plane has liquidised and followed.
This is the (utterly ludicrous and laughable were it not coming from an elected government..) explanation for the almost complete lack of any Boeing bits..
Oh, don’t forget that pristine lawn.Sounds like this 757, hitting a concrete building at hundreds of mph, suffered pretty much the same fate as a D.U. round meets when it’s penetrating an armored tank, i.e. it burns and melts and partially vaporizes. There’s nothing ludicrous or laughable about those physics, except when a fraudulating fool like yourself tries to explain them away. I hope nobody here has forgotten your lengthy ignorance parade, (week before last?) on the subject of D.U. munitions; it should give our readers a good idea of your knowledge on this subject.
Pristine lawn? Yeah right! Check this photo out and tell me how “pristine” that lawn is, then tell me how you DON’T see the “Boeing bits.”Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 03 28 at 02:11 PM • permalink
- Stoop Davy Dave,
Thank you for your posts.
See ya.LLL, if you bother coming back and read this, I’ll admit I was being a shit with you, with regards to the manatee cracks, and for that I apologize. I stick by my guns on everything else I said though.
See ya.Dreyfuze,
May a skyscraper fall on you.
See ya.
- Just don’t let a skyscraper collapse inward on him. It would be so cruel for his last few moments to be filled with confusion.Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 03 28 at 07:58 PM • permalink
- 123 ..(et al) Well well, he/she popped up to give us the benefit of his/her deep and extensive scientific knowledge.
Glad to see you are using references nowadays, StoopD Dave, even if from the somewhat contentious Popular Mechanics article.Comments re Steel refer explicitly to WTC.. As below..
Your comments 129 and 130 and the numbers they present are internally inconsistent.
Melted steel implies (!!..) temperatures higher than those at which steel melts.
“NIST reports that pockets of fire hit 1832°F(=1000°C..) . (your quote … but altered units..??)
Steel melts at over 1500°C. Odd that.. Understand??
Avgas in AIR burn COOLER than avgas in 100% Oxygen, but HOTTER than in an Oxygen depleted environment.
Remember “Physical Chemistry 101”?Comments re bits of 80 ton aircraft (as you would realise if you read my posts) refer explicitly to Flight 77. You are confused re the different issue.
Following comments also refer to Flight 77..
Yes, there are a great many bits of debris all around, but is that consistent with other images of similar catastrophic aircrashes??
Have you seen the pictures from Lockerbie?? Plenty of gouges and readily identifiable aircraft bits and that was after fires and explosions too.
I doubt anybody expects to see a “cartoon-like outline of itself into a reinforced concrete building” but they do expect more external debris from 80 tons of aircraft
“In this case, one wing hit the ground; the other was sheared off by the force of the impact with the Pentagon’s load-bearing columns, explains Sozen, who specializes in the behavior of concrete buildings.”
OK..Where is the gouged lawn from the impact of the wing and engine? Where are bits of the wings themselves? Oh, I forgot this newly discovered phenomenon…
“What was left of the plane flowed into the structure in a state closer to a liquid than a solid mass.” WTF??? Reference for this extraordinary effect Please.
It is plausible that Flight 77 concertinered up, but really hard bits (like those pesky engines and their mountings) should be a little more obvious.. Or did they “flow” too??The reports of the various witnesses are troubling and curious, in light of other far less clear cut “evidence”.
It would be very interesting to re-interview them again now AND to view the films that were removed or altered.
Quite possible that they would throw a great deal of light on to what is a very confused and curious episode.
Toxic Blob may take exception to that last but, to state the obvious, that is what the thread is about, basically.Glad you brought up the issue of DU. You are confused/blowing smoke there too..
Your comments about half-life and implied “safety” indicate a failure to understand “Very Basic Radiation Physics 101” and the nature of nuclear particles. Neither do you appear to understand the implications of accumulation in various tissue types consequent on continuous ingestion or inhalation.
The pyrogenic properties of DU to which you allude, are not shared by aluminium, by the way.
Please get it right before you try and blow off other people, whether you like their views and data or not.
- #134 Steel melts at 1500°C.
Granted, but at what temperture would it become flexible? I suspect at a somewhat cooler temp? The supports only needed give ever so much to begin the collapse.I see your point on flight 77. I could find scant photographic evidence to deny what you say. But, taking the “if not a plane, then what” viewpoint, I haven’t seen a credible example of what else it could have been (ie: no blast crater).
- Anyone interested in what the actual eyewitnesses had to say can see a collection of their statements at this website.
This is an open and shut case based on what these people have to say alone. But as the old saying goes “if the law is on your side, argue the law. If the facts are on your side, argue the facts. If neither the facts or the law is on your side, pound the table.” The facts are on the side of the official story, I’m not interested in listening to a lot of table pounding.
Page 1 of 1 pages
At least he doesn’t behave as if he’s the “real” President, like his dad…