Re: Rosie O'Donnell 9/11 Conspiracy Comments: Popular Mechanics Responds ( 1 of 4)
John P.
> Recently, Rosie O'Donnell, a co-host of ABC talk show The View, made
> comments
> on the show that renewed controversy over the collapse of World Trade
> Center
> 7.
Recently? Rosie O'Donnell hasn't been a co-host of The View recently.
Nice rerun Dumbass. Writer strike leave you without any new material?
Of course, with Rosie's extensive engineering background (she designs the
underwear that hold her fat ass up) and experience in demolitions (you
should see what she can do to a box of Twinkies in a matter of seconds), she
is the perfect person to tell us "The Truth" about what happened on 9/11.
quintal
Jo...@nospam.com says...
and who is the person to tell you the truth about 911?
why do you need to rely on external authority, moron?
--
l'alchimie pour les nuls:
http://www.divshare.com/download/849034-e1c
quintal
you're no moron.
your comment is stupid nonetheless.
John P.
>> Of course, with Rosie's extensive engineering background (she designs the
>> underwear that hold her fat ass up) and experience in demolitions (you
>> should see what she can do to a box of Twinkies in a matter of seconds),
>> she
>> is the perfect person to tell us "The Truth" about what happened on 9/11.
> and who is the person to tell you the truth about 911?
> why do you need to rely on external authority, moron?
I rely on the facts and evidence.
You rely on Rosie O'Donnell... and external "authority", moron.
John P.
> sorry john, i hadnt seen it was you.
> you're no moron.
> your comment is stupid nonetheless.
LOL! Belay my last then too. :-D
889887676
"John P." <Jo...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:TYWdnUZHyPpgRC7a...@comcast.com...
> "quintal" <qui...@francom.esoterisme> wrote in a message
>
>>> Of course, with Rosie's extensive engineering background (she designs
>>> the
>>> underwear that hold her fat ass up) and experience in demolitions (you
>>> should see what she can do to a box of Twinkies in a matter of seconds),
>>> she
>>> is the perfect person to tell us "The Truth" about what happened on
>>> 9/11.
>
>> and who is the person to tell you the truth about 911?
>> why do you need to rely on external authority, moron?
>
> I rely on the facts and evidence.
wishful thinking.
> You rely on Rosie O'Donnell... and external "authority", moron.
and you rely on zelikow, johnny.
ps.
i bet that in a two years time you'll be saying how you knew all along
that zelikow obstructed justice while he was governing 911 commission
from the background, johnny.
Vandar
-The "truth" movement, without any valid investigating of its own,
chants "9/11 was an inside job" and tries to convince everyone that the
government is an all-powerful entity capable of murdering 3,000 of its
own citizens without fear of being exposed.
-For years, debunkers told them that 9/11 exposed government
incompetence, not complicity, and that the Commission was run by those
loyal to Bush, thereby masking that incompetence.
-A report comes out stating that the Executive Director of the
Commission was a Bush loyalist who claims the Commission masked
government incompetence (not complicity).
-The "truth" movement says "Told you so!"
Gotta love the "truthers" for constantly moving the goalposts.
John P.
> ps.
> i bet that in a two years time you'll be saying how you knew all along
> that zelikow obstructed justice while he was governing 911 commission
> from the background, johnny.
Bet as much as you're willing to lose.
John P.
>> i bet that in a two years time you'll be saying how you knew all along
>> that zelikow obstructed justice while he was governing 911 commission
>> from the background, johnny.
> -The "truth" movement, without any valid investigating of its own, chants
> "9/11 was an inside job" and tries to convince everyone that the
> government is an all-powerful entity capable of murdering 3,000 of its own
> citizens without fear of being exposed.
> -For years, debunkers told them that 9/11 exposed government incompetence,
> not complicity, and that the Commission was run by those loyal to Bush,
> thereby masking that incompetence.
> -A report comes out stating that the Executive Director of the Commission
> was a Bush loyalist who claims the Commission masked government
> incompetence (not complicity).
> -The "truth" movement says "Told you so!"
>
> Gotta love the "truthers" for constantly moving the goalposts.
They make perfect circles while chasing their tails.
889887676
"Vandar" <vand...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:%fZsj.4165$7d1...@news01.roc.ny...
that's how you see the truth movement, vandar, and thank god you are not
everyone.
> -For years, debunkers told them that 9/11 exposed government incompetence,
> not complicity, and that the Commission was run by those loyal to Bush,
> thereby masking that incompetence.
really? and tell me, if bush admin is so incompetent, how the hell did they
manage
to win the elections, not once but twice? and tell me, if they are sooo
"incompetent",
why no one ended in jail? punished? anything?
my oh my, vandar... i guess you're the competent one, because you've
"figured out"
their "incompetence".
> -A report comes out stating that the Executive Director of the Commission
> was a Bush loyalist who claims the Commission masked government
> incompetence (not complicity).
well, i guess you'll just have to wait for the wtc7 report to come out, and
some
70 videos from around the pentagon to be released, vandar.
> -The "truth" movement says "Told you so!"
is that your real problem with the truth movement, vandar?
> Gotta love the "truthers" for constantly moving the goalposts.
oh, excuse me mr. noneedtoseethepentagonvideotapes.
or do you prefer mr. therewerenocamerasaroundthepentagon?
anyway, get back to me when you figure out why mr. dick and mr. walker
gave their testimonies in front of the 911 commission without being under
oath
and without any transcription of their testimonies, vandar.
889887676
i don't bet (with) liars, sorry johnny.
Al Dykes
What does that have to do with the core claims of the Truth Movement:
man-made explosives and molten steel on the pile at WTC and something
other than an 4 hijacked commercial airplanes causing all the damage.
Purge the nuts that base their other beliefs on that bullshit and
maybe you will actually help find something.
6 years of made up shit and fraudulent quotes, and parotted opinions
from non-experts and you've still got nothing that convinces people
that know something about civil engineering, aviation, or demolition
or were eyewitnesses or were any of the estimated 70,000 first
responders and investigators of the events of 9/11.
The movement that uses the word, "Truth" too much and continues to use
people's names and quotes without permission and out of context and
continues to produce bullshit faster than fact-based people can shovel
it. I know two of the names here are people that think Twwofers are
nuts.
I also know that most of these people are making claims for which they
have zero professional expertise and therefor their request for a "new
investigation" counts for no more than my Aunt Tilly.
That has nothing to do with the engineering analysis of the collapse
of three WTC towers and the aviation crash scene analysis at the
Pentagon and Shanksville that all show that 4 jets caused all the
destruction on 9/11.
Several million people witnessesed some bit of the events of
9/11. Millions of us know people that saw other bits. These people
know that the people that call themselves the "Truth Movement" have
based their claims on fraudulent quotes and invented shit. Essentially
no eyewitnesses are part of the "Truth Movement". Those that are can
be counted on the fingers of onen hand and tend to make sh*t up,.
Some of us know the hacked and cherry-picked quotes that the "Truth
Movement" uses to make shit up about the WTC.
On one hand, you use out-of-context firemen's quotes to claim that
they saw man-made explosives at WTC. On the other hand, when presented
to you, you ignore the quotes of firemen that make it clear that WTC7
was on fire all day and beginning to collapse hours before it came
down. Each quote has to be red unedited and in full context. The
"Truth Movement doesn't do that.
To believe that something other than 4 hijacked airplanes caused all
the destruction on 9/11 is to look stupid and IMO, this is the real
purpose of the "Truth Movement", to make critics of the administration
look like idiots
The "Truth Movement" doesn't dispute the massive public record for the
events of 9/11. Worthy of Orwell's memory hole, they try to deny that
a public record exists to be fact-checked and to use to fact-check the
made-up shit that Truth Movement people parrot. People that were not
in NYC, Washington, DC, or Western PA on 9/11 and afterwords (or were
to young to watch the news) don't realize that about 70,000 people
worked on the recovery and thousands of reporters working for 100s of
news outlets told their stories, daily in the local media. The
workers saw, nightly, their stories and nobody ever said that the
media got it wrong in significant ways. The "Truth Movement" would
have you believe that the stories that anyone can get via computer
today never happened.
Thousands of eyewitnesses saw some aspect of the events of 9/11 and
they saw things that were consistant with PM and the "Standard Story"
and contrary to Twoofer claims.
First, I believe my own eyes as as someone familiar with WTC before
9/11, what I saw where I was in Manhattan on 9/11 and and what I saw
of the pile starting a couple weeks after 9/11. Then I believe my
friends, some of which were in WTC on 9/11 and worked on the pile for
months, afterwords.
There are many thousands of eyewitnesses and first-responders. WTC was
possibly the best photographed disaster in history. There are many
thousands of photographs and video segments. The "Truth Movement"
shows only a few and they are cherry-picked to make a point and any
evidence to the contrary is edited out.
The post-9/11 analysis and reporting is consistent with what the
eyewitnesses say and what the video record shows.
Any claim made by the "Truth Movement" has to be examined in the
context of ALL of the above.
In 6 years of whining, they have said NOTHING that fits the eyewitness
statements and the video record.
You are in unencumbered by any facts.
There is a reason why no Mahattanites that were eyewitnesses to the
plane impacts are part of the "truth movement".
It isn't just eyewitnesses, anyway, they are just part of a huge
record for the "standard story". The Twoofers have do discredit large
parts of that record AND propose an alternative theory that is
consistant with the rest of the record before thet can be taken
seriously.
Only when each bit of evidence is evaluated in the context of all the
evidence, all the eyewitness reports and the laws of physics and the
educated, informed opinion of relevent experts.
You can't cherry-pick some and ignore the rest.
Nobody with any relevant expertise in aviation or civil engineering is
using that expertise to explain how something is wrong in the
"standard story" in any way that makes sense to others with relevant
expertise.
Nobody in the "Truth Movement" is speaking within their area of
expertise unless it's a theologian speaking about "belief". Most of
the people listed by the "Truth Movement' as having technical
expertise turn out to have exaggerated their resumes when checked.
There are no eyewitnesses to "molten metal" on the pile at WTC. All
the stories turn out to be second-hand when researched.
There are no eyewitnesses that say they saw evidence of man-made
explosives at WTC. "explosion" is just a good word for "loud noise".
Nobody heard explosions as loud as the 1993 bombing consistent with
the video of the collapse. Thermite takes minutes to operate and
produces voluminous white light, white smoke and slag. Nobody saw
light and smoke prior to the collapse. Nobody found the slag,
afterwords.
Every quote of a NY fireman provided by the "Truth Movement" is a lie,
edited and out of context and without citation. The "Truth Movement"
censors information that contradicts Truthy claims.
Nobody heard explsions of size and timing consistant with any of the
collapses of any of the buildings at WTC. The explosions would have
been larger and louder than the 1993 bomb (about half a ton of TNT,
equiv) which everyone hear and didn't come close to bringing a tower
down.
At the Pentagon, There are hundreds of eyewitnesses that saw the plane
approach the building low and fast. Nobody saw that jet fly over it
and leave. Many of them saw it crash.
In PA, 95% of the aircraft debris of Flight 93 has been recovered and
all the passengers have identified by DNA.
So much for "truth".
Everyone should get the bittorent for the HBO show about the Truth
Movement for a good laugh.
"The 9 - 11 Conspiracies - Fact or Fiction"
http://www.torrentbox.com/torrent_details?id=125450
Thousands of people at each site, Pentagon, Shanksville, and WTC would
have to be in on the conspiracy for it to not fall apart. There is
masive evidence at each and all of the sites that are consistant with
4 jets causing all the damage on 9/11.
All 4 planes and all 3 crash sites have all of these things in common.
Eyewitnesses for the plane crash and no
eyewitnesses for any consistant alternatinve hypothisis.
DNA [1]
Luggage scraps
Jewelry identification
airplane parts consistant with airplane typose and some having serial numbers.
4 Airplanes that were seen by air control to trun to unplanned routes and turn off transponders
never landed that day and have never been seen again.
People that never came home that day.
Black boxes with consistent serial numbers, most of which had
good data consistant with the standard story
Phone calls from the planes.
Radar tracks and FAA communication with airplanes,
There were hundreds of first responders at the Pentagon, 1700 at
Shanksville. At WTC, a thousand responded on 9/11 adn 3,000 worked on
"the pile".
[1] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6111758.stm FLight 11
--
Al Dykes
News is something someone wants to suppress, everything else is advertising.
- Lord Northcliffe, publisher of the Daily Mail
Vandar
That's how the "truth" movement presents its version of events.
>>-For years, debunkers told them that 9/11 exposed government incompetence,
>>not complicity, and that the Commission was run by those loyal to Bush,
>>thereby masking that incompetence.
>
>
> really? and tell me, if bush admin is so incompetent, how the hell did they
> manage
> to win the elections, not once but twice?
The first time around, no one knew they would be incompetent. The second
time around, the Democrats put a guy who committed treason in the 70s up
against him.
He won twice because the Democrats couldn't put up a half decent
candidate. Pretty sad. Especially John Kerry.
> and tell me, if they are sooo "incompetent",
> why no one ended in jail? punished? anything?
No one ended up in jail because incompetence isn't illegal.
> my oh my, vandar... i guess you're the competent one, because you've
> "figured out"
> their "incompetence".
>
>
>>-A report comes out stating that the Executive Director of the Commission
>>was a Bush loyalist who claims the Commission masked government
>>incompetence (not complicity).
>
>
> well, i guess you'll just have to wait for the wtc7 report to come out, and
> some
> 70 videos from around the pentagon to be released, vandar.
What's that have to do with anything?
>>-The "truth" movement says "Told you so!"
>
>
> is that your real problem with the truth movement, vandar?
It's the "truth" movement's real problem with reality.
>>Gotta love the "truthers" for constantly moving the goalposts.
>
>
> oh, excuse me mr. noneedtoseethepentagonvideotapes.
>
> or do you prefer mr. therewerenocamerasaroundthepentagon?
Here
http://baldur.globalsymmetry.com/fact911/images/misc/010914-F-8006R-003.jpg
Point out the cameras.
> anyway, get back to me when you figure out why mr. dick and mr. walker
> gave their testimonies in front of the 911 commission without being under
> oath
> and without any transcription of their testimonies, vandar.
It's called covering your ass. It's done quite often in Washington.
harry k
> "Vandar" <vanda...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:%fZsj.4165$7d1...@news01.roc.ny...
>
>
<snip>
>
> > -For years, debunkers told them that 9/11 exposed government incompetence,
> > not complicity, and that the Commission was run by those loyal to Bush,
> > thereby masking that incompetence.
>
> really? and tell me, if bush admin is so incompetent, how the hell did they
> manage
> to win the elections, not once but twice? and tell me, if they are sooo
> "incompetent",
> why no one ended in jail? punished? anything?
>
> my oh my, vandar... i guess you're the competent one, because you've
> "figured out"
> their "incompetence".
>
<snip>
Did you somehow miss all the controversy over _both_ elections?
Bother were so close that the Supremes had to decide one and a case
can still be made that he lost that one. And that is when he was
running against someone that a dunce should have been able beat
handily.
If that is a sample of your reasoning....
Now why don't you surprise everybody and post something showing 911
conspiracy _that hasn't been debunked repeatedly for the past 5 years
minimum_?
Harry K
Al Dykes
harry k <turnk...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Feb 15, 2:12=A0am, "889887676" <889887...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> "Vandar" <vanda...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:%fZsj.4165$7d1...@news01.roc.ny...
>>
>>
>
><snip>
>
>>
>e,
>> > not complicity, and that the Commission was run by those loyal to Bush,
>> > thereby masking that incompetence.
>>
>y
>> manage
>> to win the elections, not once but twice? and tell me, if they are sooo
>> "incompetent",
>> why no one ended in jail? punished? anything?
>>
>> my oh my, vandar... i guess you're the competent one, because you've
>> "figured out"
>> their "incompetence".
>>
>
><snip>
>
>Did you somehow miss all the controversy over _both_ elections?
>Bother were so close that the Supremes had to decide one and a case
>can still be made that he lost that one. And that is when he was
>running against someone that a dunce should have been able beat
>handily.
Which has nothing to do with the core claims of the Truth Movement:
man-made explosives and molten steel on the pile at WTC and something
other than an 4 hijacked commercial airplanes causing all the damage.
Purge the k00ks that base their other beliefs on that bullshit and
maybe you will actually help find something.
--
Anyone that hasn't seen WTC's Ground Zero in NYC and the "Truth
Movement" kooks that hang out there should look at the first three
videos. The others should be required viewing by anyone that has an
opinion about 9/11 and WTC or has never been to NYC.
Ground Zero 911 Conspiracy Wars by Ray Rivera http://rayrivera.net
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4162315283354424113
The Ground Zeros by Mark Roberts
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5004042232637229146&hl=en
WTC Ground Zero 9/11/2007 Sad.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qr2LeCXXIjo
Les Jamieson and others of NY911Truth.org disparages the FDNY
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/ny911truth.orgmembersdisparagethefdnyatg
How famous Truth Movement people repond to unfortunate truths that
show them for what they are
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/semiliterateparanoiacswhofantasizeaboutt
The Naudet Film about 9/11 at WTC
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6371069744838112957&q=Naudet
Marks's collapse video
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2083421624495848233&hl=en
"The 9 - 11 Conspiracies - Fact or Fiction"
http://www.torrentbox.com/torrent_details?id=125450
--
John P.
>> -The "truth" movement, without any valid investigating of its own, chants
>> "9/11 was an inside job" and tries to convince everyone that the
>> government is an all-powerful entity capable of murdering 3,000 of its
>> own citizens without fear of being exposed.
> that's how you see the truth movement, vandar, and thank god you are not
> everyone.
God has nothing to do with it. But, yes... Vandar isn't "everyone". If he
spoke for "everyone", you'd have to include the almost 300, and dwindling,
kooks who make up the truth movement.
Thankfully, there are so few of you. The school shooters make it clear what
happens when you kooks go over the edge.
John P.
>>> i bet that in a two years time you'll be saying how you knew all along
>>> that zelikow obstructed justice while he was governing 911 commission
>>> from the background, johnny.
>> Bet as much as you're willing to lose.
> i don't bet (with) liars, sorry johnny.
I don't give a rats ass who you bet with. It was your statement..."i bet
that..."
Remember, dumbass?
I'm just suggesting you not bet any more than you are willing to lose, as I
can assure you, the bet you indicate is a bet you would lose.