Thursday, 14 January 2010

From Stromfront

For my part, in many cases with films such as The Money Makers and other documentaries, I don't really miss the direct pointing out of the culprits; after all, it's so obvious. Obvious enough for the Jews themselves, who realize very well that almost all 'conspiracy theories' (= bits and pieces of forbidden knowledge) in the end will point in one direction....
LINK

161 comments:

socrates said...

Hi TLNL,

Have you ever looked into Lyndon LaRouche? My recent research topics are leading me to him and his Executive Intelligence Review. They are reminding me of a smoother version of the Capt. Eric May approach.

I've also stumbled across something you might want to check out. It's called Rex Curry dot Net. It's a website put together by a "libertarian" and he seems to be arguing that Nazi Germany was created in America. He's also spreading the meme that the word Socialist used by the Nazis actually referred to socialism. Some very crazy stuff. It just shows that internet disinfo is not just about Rivero and Jones, though those two are the most visible, imho.

Time marches on. Good to see you are still around. Best of wishes for you this new year.

the_last_name_left said...

hiya

LaRouche? Yeah - a little. Until I marked him down as just another nut.

Self-publicist douchebag imo.

He's also spreading the meme that the word Socialist used by the Nazis actually referred to socialism. Some very crazy stuff. I

I had a look - I think he's a kook.

Nazi attitudes to socialism were made apparent (if they weren't already) by the night of the long knives, whereby the right destroyed any remnants of the leftish wing of the nazi party: Strasser was murdered, and the SA purged. Also called the Rohm putsch, IIRC.

y- same old innit? anti-socialist paranoia......from Rex Curry, I mean.

Nazism was socialism.....which came from USA. Which means USA is threatened by.....socialism!

Gee. Who'd have thought it?

:D

I came across something the other day suggesting Nazi sources (in 1943!) were talking about plans to send nazism underground should they suffer defeat in WW2.....the plan being to reactivate it later.....amongst the American Christian movement! Sounds too accurate to be true, imo, but the source seems credible (at first glance)

HAppy new year to you!

socrates said...

Thanks.

I have a new blog entry up on LaRouche. I didn't think he was that big a deal either. We were wrong. He can also be tied to Rivero and Jones through Webster Tarpley. The guy has intelligence connections. He's running cults. I think he might be the Kingpin for right woos left. I mean the dude behind the curtain of all the crap we see on the net.


Lyndon LaRouche Is A Terrible Human Being


My blogging has gotten much better since my aircraft wing days. DFQ2 is picking up some serious mojo. If your email address is the one at aircraft wings, I can invite you as a blogger, if you ever want to cross-post or (cough) provide an exclusive. Or if you have another email address, you can pm it to me at aircraft wings and I'll invite you over. I'm not saying to give up on this place and come under my command. If you can cross-post, I think we could build up a nice little blog, an important one. We might be able to get a third blogger too.

I feel we have them on the ropes. By the way, you were mentioned again at RI as being my sock puppet. Man, if I was all the people I'm accused of being, I'd be running a crew of ten people working around the clock. I think it's a sign that we figured amazing things out, that we have been attacked so much. I've also a creeping suspicion that your find linking Rivero to PMC4 LLC. was a major find. Because then it's linked to that tinfoil publisher and of course that former Dept. of Justice dude. I'm telling you last dude left, we are winning this war. When a guy like Larry Simons and ourselves reach some kind of detente, that's got to tell you we have made some puncture wounds into internet propaganda. Check out that LaRouche piece if you get the chance. I think it might open your eyes a bit. Rivero and Jones can't be the top of the food chain, not even close.

Take it easy.

socrates said...

Oops, forgot to tell you, the third post on previous entry is spam. You should make sure you're being emailed all posts so you can moderate.

Larry said...

My god, your blog completely sucks. ONE post all year? LOL. Since you come to my blog and fail to comment on things I ask, then Ill ask it here. Al Gore claimed in his 2006 movie "An Inconvenient Truth" that sea levels will increase by 20 feet and then he showed 3 examples of this---on the SF bay coast, Florida and Manhattan. If he believed his OWN prediction--why did he purchase a $4 million dollar condo the VERY SAME YEAR his movie came out along the SF bay coastline at the St. Regis hotel at Fisherman's Wharf???

Got an answer? I cant wait to hear it!!

Larry said...

ah ha! I KNEW id be ignored.

socrates said...

Larry, thinking types have better things to do than worry about right wingers like yourself.

It only took you how many years to figure out Alex Jones is disinformation?

socrates said...

TLNL, the buggers are still saying we are the same person. I count four blogs which have done that. WRH, RI, PI, and BradBlog.

Too bad Trausti has hidden his forum and your 10,000 posts. They would show no way one person could have posted our combined totals.

I have noticed a trend that anyone pointing out right woos left with documentation tends to be smeared as being the same disinfo focker. It's a failed policy, imho. It has led to many blogs losing credibility due to their insane and paranoid attacks on common nobody lefties like ourselves.

Larry said...

Right-wingers? Apparently, youve never been to my blog. I hate the Bush family, I do hundreds of articles bashing O Reilly, Hannity, Glenn Beck, Coulter, John McCain, Giuliani---and just about ANYONE right wing. That makes me right wing??

Larry said...

The problem with you two guys is that you just say over and over that people are nutty and their views crazy, but you NEVER EVER say WHY. You NEVER refute anything. You just simply name-call and say "kooky", "nutty" and any other synonym that means crazy. Try telling people WHY they are "nuts"!

socrates said...

Larry, I'll back off of my criticism of you. It was a knee-jerk reaction to defend my internet friend. He can defend himself.

As for never supporting contentions that certain internet folks are nutty tinfoil, that's a stretch.

I just put up a new entry at davefromqueens2.blogspot called "Innocent People Went to Prison." You can scroll down to the stuff on a Dr. Corydon Hammond and see the type of crap I have been looking into lately.

It's probably not your cup of tea. You know, Larry, there are just going to be many situations where people have different world views and topics that interest them.

I do think it's cool that a general detente was reached by yourselves. It was wrong of TLNL to have had that putdown of yourself in the comment box many months ago. I like that he got rid of it. I like how you guys are able to communicate with each other without the invective you used to have.

I am impressed that as a Libertarian, you are in the process of cleaning your own house, so to speak.

But to say myself or TLNL haven't articulated or backed up our ideas is just not true. It also appears that TLNL is on a blogging holiday. So I wouldn't take his absence from your blog personally.

Larry said...

Theres where youre wrong. TLNL was on my blog yesterday morning around 11 am [but did not post]. My sitemeter tells me when people have been on. I like to view it from time to time to be able to tell when hacks like TLNL come to my site and when they have no refutations, they leave without anything to say. I guess his copy and paste abilities was on holiday yesterday. Tell me ONE time TLNL has ever criticized anything I said, and then backed it up with evidence that supported HIS view.

Remember, this is the same guy that, in order to prove there have been other universal collapses of buildings [other than WTC 7], told me that the McCormick Center in Chicago was an example of one. Of course, he was just copying and pasting from "debunking" websites and never investigated the FACT that the McCormick Center was NOT a universal collapse [the outer walls remained standing]. I cant tell you how many times Ive mentioned this to him AFTER he brought that up---but it would also be the same number of times he's IGNORED me saying it. Why is he ignoring it? Because he was REFUTED and his pussy ass wont admit it.

He also believes in global warming which is a proven FRAUD, and his buddy Al Gore bought a $4 million dollar condo on the San Francisco Bay the SAME YEAR his film "An Inconvenient Truth" came out in which he explained in the film that sea levels would rise 20 feet and cover the coastlines of SF Bay [WHERE HE BOUGHT HIS CONDO]---and TLNL still follows Gore the fraud.

Then, when TLNL tries to DENY that he follows Gore---I simply remind him that he supports his findings, something else he cant refute. Have you ever noticed how many questions he ignores? How he spins and diverts from subjects? How he will purposely take a portion of my comment out of context and ignore the rest of the comment [which usually is the MAIN point Im making]? He does this quite a bit.

To this day, after asking him over and over to prove a Willis Carto/Alex Jones connection, he has still failed to do so. Instead, he sends me a picture of Ron Paul with 2 unknown stormfront guys---calling THAT proof there's a Carto/Jones connection! WTF????

Larry said...

Socrates---I checked out your article but its very hard to follow. Your method of writing seems to be aimed at people who have already been frequenting your blog and they know what you've been talking about. You cant write like that and expect people to follow it. You should write articles like I do, easy to follow as if theyve never been to your blog before.

the_last_name_left said...

Pretty tedious.

Al Gore is "right" or "wrong".....and so stands or falls science.

It's just silly.

And Willis Carto's "links" to Alex Jones?

You just deny any of them are relevant - you seemingly fail to understand the obvious. You don't understand. So be it.

The way you appear to understand the world, there's no "link" between Stomfront and Adolf Hitler.

No photos - no payslips - so nothing "linking" them.

By contrast, I would draw attention to your extreme reaction to anyone that would say something as vague as wanting "a New World Order", for example.

In such a case, you would have no problem in "linking" anyone whom spoke such language. Nevermind that it's just a single vague phrase.

And that's what you do all the time, through 911 conspiracy for example: make tenuous links between people.

But when confronted by the ideological similarities between your "heroes" and the far-right suddenly your ability to make "connections" disappears.

As does your will to fearlessly "ask difficult questions" disappears.......that disappears too.

SO........all a bit tedious.

As for McCormick - the point is that a steel structure can collapse in fire - and fairly quickly - and catastrophically.

The McCormick was not a structure like the WTC.....

They were "skyscrapers". All the weight is going through a small area. The collapses started at the impact zone.....and continued down from there. Not like a demolition at all.

But you think there were explosives there? Deliberately set off, with exquisite precision and skill.

And here we can ask where's your particularity for evidence of "links"?

photos of explosives? paystubs?

All part of some massive conspiracy? Photos? Paystubs?

Whereas Alex Jones calling Eustace Mullins "a literal modern-day founding father" is nothing?

socrates said...

Fair enough with your critique of my blogging. In my defense, should a Professor be blamed for not going over basics too much in higher level courses? You might like my new entry on Martha Coakley. That one is easier to follow.

I've already made it clear that I'm not into 9/11 conspiracy theory. I could go either way with that. I do not for one second believe Bush and Cheney were in on it. If it was an inside job, it would have to do with rats in intelligence agencies.

I do take a look sometimes at what you guys present on it. My take is that separate issues often get conflated. There is the right woos left disinfo, then there are the specifics points you guys debate.

Now you are bringing global warming as a hoax into the equation. Al Gore is not a scientist. I don't believe that global warming is man-made, because of anything Al says. I look at what the scientists say. The ones who debunk it as anthropogenic appear to have right wing ideologies. They appear to have ties to oil companies.

As for saying Alex Jones isn't tied to Willis Carto, I couldn't disagree with you more. Michael Rivero is clearly tied to Carto. Michael Rivero is clearly tied to Alex Jones. I know what the argument of my point will be. That this is McCarthyite tactics, some distortion of Kevin Bacon's six degrees of separation hypothesis. I don't buy that.

Webster Tarpley can be clearly tied to Lyndon Larouche. He wrote for his disinfo rag and has been deeply involved with the US version of Larouche's Schiller Institute cult. It's a similar thing to Jones being tied to Carto. Both of them spin global conspiracy schtick. Jones might not be overtly anti-semitic, but he doesn't have to be. He plugs Rivero enough to prove that his illuminati crap is mostly to do with the Jooos. It's Alex Jones using coded language.

As for TLNL visiting your website and not posting, look at it like when we are chasing girls. If they know we are after them, they tend to run away. Perhaps if we act more cool about it, they give us a looksie. I personally feel that TLNL seems to be on a bit of a blogging hiatus. You can't force people to blog on your website, and in general, people don't like to be manhandled into doing anything.

But I could be wrong. Nonetheless, I think 9/11 debate or whatever will survive, even if you two eventually go your separate ways.

socrates said...

The problem with 9/11 debunkers is they have an answer for everything, usually delivered in the most knee-jerk, smarmy manner. Not saying you TLNL but in general.

The BYU professor found traces of explosives in the dust. The steel remains were quickly destroyed. Building 7 dropped funny. Intelligence agencies had offices in that thing.

The lack of black boxes being found is very fishy. Is the man who helped with the recovery and claims to have seen one of them lying? He doesn't seem to be.

Sure the cui bono argument is always annoying to hear. But look at how the US got its excuse to invade Iraq while passing the Patriot Act and establishing the spy factories.

I'm just definitely not into getting into predictable believer versus closed-minded debunker threads. I think Larry gets too emotional in his writings, and I think TLNL conflates the presence of obvious disinfo merchants such as Rivero, Carto, and Jones as proof that the official story rings true.

I don't think either of you guys are paid disinfo, but if you can't keep your cool and respectfully debate specific points, it seems like a useless conversation. Seriously TLNL, you haven't proven much in regards to debunking 9/11 conspiracy theories, but I do believe you've done important work in outing disinformation networks revolving around anti-semitism.

the_last_name_left said...

The lack of black boxes being found is very fishy.

Fishy? Why?

And what does the lack of black-boxes actually mean?

What does it ABSOLUTELY and DEFINITELY prove?

socrates said...

They are virtually indestructible. I know, they aren't suspected to have all that weight crashing on them. But I don't know. This is all too much to figure out, from my perspective. I don't understand how you can be so sure 9/11 went the way the official report says it did. Building 7 man, that's dodgy. Do you think Bellone is lying about seeing one of the black boxes? That thing could contradict the official report. I think it's lame to discuss this with a hard-core debunker like yourself, nor with a hard-core believer like Larry. I don't trust either of you to have the ability to think objectively. That's why I tend not to go near this topic. You two are symbolic of the whole way this thing is discussed on the net. Nothing personal.

Larry said...

"As for McCormick - the point is that a steel structure can collapse in fire - and fairly quickly - and catastrophically.

The McCormick was not a structure like the WTC.....

They were "skyscrapers". All the weight is going through a small area. The collapses started at the impact zone.....and continued down from there. Not like a demolition at all."

Hilarious! YOURE the one who brought the McCormick Center into the debate---NOT ME! You use it as an example of a "universal" collapse [which its NOT] and then, when I debunk you---you say "well, that building DID collapse and it wasnt built like WTC 7"! LOL---then why did you mention it, dickhead?

A collapse isnt the same as UNIVERSAL collapse. They are TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. Plus, I asked you to GIVE ME AN EXAMPLE of a universal collapse BEFORE you mentioned McCormick---and your answer was The McCormick Center. You used it as your DEFENSE, then when I debunk you, then you attempt to distance yourself from your own example! Im laughing my freaking head off!

By the way Last Penis Left----why havent you come to my blog and addressed my post in the recent story I posted from Watson? AFRAID of the truth? I know youve even been on my site---but didnt post anything. Why so scared??

the_last_name_left said...

S: I don't understand how you can be so sure 9/11 went the way the official report says it did.

Ah - but I feel that's a micharacterisation of my position.

We actually have reports, and lots of positive evidence for the seemingly obvious.

We do *not* even have blackboxes, let alone blackboxes saying something definitely contrary to the seemingly obvious.

If they had been found and vindicated the seemingly obvious, it would just be claimed that they were forged, or the data changed, or whatever.

But in fact, it appears "we" do not have them. That's all that can be safely said.

The problem is bundling this incident - which is really a lack of knowledge - into a wider scheme......and filtering one's view of it through that scheme. SO almost automatically we can go from "no black boxes" to a conspiracy. It must have happened like that - because it fits the wider scheme - and so it's the best explanation. And so this new "fact" of the conspiracy scheme adds to the conspiracy scheme itself - adding strength to it - to make it all the more encompassing and attractive. Even though by itself, the fact of no black boxes being found adds no definite positive evidence of conspiracy at all at this moment.

You say the non-recovery of blackboxes is "fishy". And everyone surely understands what you mean by saying that.

but.......are they really designed to survive all that? Is it really so astonishing that they weren't recovered? I'm still inclined to surprise they weren't found, but........it's a fact they aren't always recovered.

And even if they were actually recovered, but their retrieval was publicly denied........that wouldn't even provide evidence of "inside job" and conspiracy, necessarily.

It seems to me 911 conspiracism is much like the other sorts.........woven together by all these strands....such as "black boxes not being found".....

But when you follow any of these strands, there's nothing actually there........it's only the weaving together of these strands which gives any appearance of coherence and substance. Separately the facts might mean nothing particularly - yet they can be woven together and the pattern attracts.....

I think there's a distinction to be made too, between rejecting "conspiracy theory" aka 911 Troof and accepting "the official line". Accepting today is a Tuesday doesn't necessarily make me 'a stooge of the NWO.'

the_last_name_left said...

I don't believe there is any direct positive evidence for "an inside job" over 911. None. At all.

All we have are these strands.....and follow any of them, and one just runs out of string: there's nothing at the end of it. Like the "missing blackboxes": it's "fishy"....even though there's no actual positive evidence of a conspiracy communicated by the simple fact of there being "missing blackboxes". Rather, it's fishy because of all these strands.....which themselves mean nothing....but which can be collected to mean "all this". Whereas individually the facts are seemingly mundane.

Just because a narrative can be drawn through a series of events in no way says that is what did happen.

It takes some positive evidence.....some tests of falsifiability to start believing some particular narrative as "truth".

The lack of blackboxes doesn't provide positive evidence for "the official line". But it certainly doesn't provide positive evidence for any conspiracy either.

And we know that if the boxes had been found, and their contents were found to support "the official line" then there would still be doubt about their authenticity. And the same style questions would be being asked.

If a conspiracy - why wouldn't they have simply "found" the blackboxes, and faked the electronic evidence to better implicate their targets?

Instead - they apparently weren't found........and suspicion prevails.

Is it any wonder?

But need that make it (un)true?

If there were good, solid, positive evidence, 911 Troof would be something.

911 Troof can't even recognise it so far has nothing. At all.

Just those strands......with nothing on the end.

Like the blackboxes. There aren't any. End of strand. It does not say "conspiracy". It says nothing - other than the simple fact (which seems difficult to acknowledge) that the blackboxes were apparently not found and therefore can say absolutely nothing about what happened.

Blackboxes were recovered from Pennsylvania. How's that? Different plan? Mixing it up?

Did they get any data off it? Whatever the answer, it's "fishy", isn't it?

Personally I'm after the facts, not support of some "official line". The lackof blackboxes says nothing, other than the fact itself - that the blackboxes add nothing.

It's quite a leap to take that plain fact as evidence for a conspiracy.

But all the other strands of similarly "true facts" that coagulate to form "conspiracy" make it a relatively easy jump to make. Indeed - the more of these "facts" one has, the more difficult it is to avoid coming to conclusions of conspiracy. Even though every single strand is as essentially meaningless as the one about a lack of airplane blackboxes.

A mind virus?

Larry said...

"But you think there were explosives there? Deliberately set off, with exquisite precision and skill."

According to Barry Jennings, who was INSIDE the building at 9am on 9-11, he witnessed the building explode BEFORE the towers collapsed. What else would make 6 or 7 floors of the building collapse and give off an exploding BOOM before the towers collapsed OTHER THAN explosives????? KEEP IN MIND, Jennings' story has NEVER changed. They interviewed him on the street on 9-11 with dust all over his suit and he said he was in WTC 7 and the floors collapsed---but since he was interviewed AFTER the towers had collapsed---it was assumed by everyone that the debris from the towers caused the damage to WTC 7. The conspiracy theories about 9-11 werent lurking on the DAY of 9-11, they came later---so Jennings wasnt parroting some theory he heard on the net---he told it like he saw it! And that story MATCHED the story he told in 2007 when he talked with the Loose Change people. What dont you get???? Do you need it on flash cards?

Larry said...

Socrates----"In my defense, should a Professor be blamed for not going over basics too much in higher level courses?"

Oh brother. What a stupid analogy. Its a prerequisite to have basic courses before taking advanced ones. Are you saying it's a prerequisite to ALREADY KNOW what youre talking about before browsing your site? If thats the case, there would be no need to go to your site! My god, you sound like TLNL now!

the_last_name_left said...

I enjoy the opposition, btw, S. I like disagreements. :)

Now for Larry?

L:
According to Barry Jennings.......


I didn't mention BJ - I spoke about your belief in exquisitely placed and timed explosive demolition of *all 3* WTC.

Oh brother. What a stupid analogy. Its a prerequisite to have basic courses before taking advanced ones. Are you saying it's a prerequisite to ALREADY KNOW what youre talking about before browsing your site? If thats the case, there would be no need to go to your site! My god, you sound like TLNL now!

Another forum - from which I am banned 100x over - has turned that into a verb. You would say Socrates has LNL'd you.

I can't believe I have been turned into a verb. How groovy is that?

Shame it's a term for the use of any sort of disreputable rhetorical device or tactic.......

Unfair imo. But still - a verb! Woohoo!

the_last_name_left said...

Its a prerequisite to have basic courses before taking advanced ones.
----------------------

What about learning backwards?

Larry said...

"Fishy? Why?

And what does the lack of black-boxes actually mean?

What does it ABSOLUTELY and DEFINITELY prove?"

First of all it means the FBI is blatantly LYING, because in 2002, it was reported that family members of Flight 93 actually got to hear about 30 minutes of the flight recorder/black box. So, if they had access to ONE of the black boxes in 2002---how could they have ZERO black boxes during the 9/11 investigation in 2004?? Thats a BLATANT lie. But you will say "hows it a lie?"

Second, it proves something is VERY wrong because black boxes are INDESTRUCTABLE. They have found black boxes in the freaking OCEAN, on planes that hit mountains, planes that crashed on the ground prior to 9-11. Socrates said because there was so much weight on the planes, he might question it? HUH? They have found black boxes in planes that hit immovable SOLID structures like mountains---and yet they couldnt find them in 3 planes that hit manmade structures that were punctured and 1 that hit the ground [supposedly]---I have NO doubt Flight 93 was shot down. A family member of my brothers girlfriend told her that she knows a retired CIA guy and he told her a few years ago "Flight 93 WAS shot down" but he told her not to say anything because it was something he wasnt supposed to know.

Thirdly, not only is the liklihood of ONE black box not being found almost completely impossible, but ALL 4????? And you say it takes incredible faith to believe what I believe??????? To not question why they say NO black boxes were found is downright idiotic and lazy.

What does it prove??? A blatant cover-up. There is something those boxes reveal that does not match the official story. Could be:

*no hijackers at all
*hijackers didnt know it was a suicide mission, but might have been paid to "scare" people with boxcutters and didnt know the planes were going to crash into buildings
*could reveal that Flight 93 was actually being FLOWN by the passengers and they would have landed safely [which is why it was shot down---as to not reveal what the job of the 'hijackers' was]

I also dont believe that the families heard ALL of the black box recording they supposedly heard. The story I read said they heard like 29 or 30 minutes of it. Calculations of when the plane crashed indicate that there was probably 3 or 4 more minutes on the recording that was not played.

How do you explain NO DEBRIS at the Flight 93 crash site on 9-11? Even people that were there said they saw NO debris. Do you believe the planes vaporized TLNL???? Again, it takes MORE faith to believe in vaporized planes.

Larry said...

Saying "My god, you sound like TLNL now!"---is NOT using it as a verb! Geeeesh!

Larry said...

Socrates-----see how TLNL COMPLETELY ignored the substance of my post about Barry Jennings and how his story had never changed from the day of 9-11 til 2007? The ONLY thing TLNL says is:

"I didn't mention BJ - I spoke about your belief in exquisitely placed and timed explosive demolition of *all 3* WTC."

That reply did not address ONE word of my point about Jennings. See what he's doing? He typed Jennings' name so he can later say he "addressed" my post about Jennings when he completely IGNORED the entire substance of the post.

Thats ALL he ever does Socrates. That has ALWAYS been the cornerstone of his debating technique----mentioning a tiny snippet of my post so he claim he addressed it while IGNORING the remaining 99.9% of it. You dont call THAT dishonest or disinfo???? Omission is also a form of lying--and when you IGNORE gigantic parts of peoples questions, thats lying by omission.

The ironic thing is, TLNL criticizes and condemns me for asking questions about 9-11 and he actually has the NERVE to doubt me when I say the government and media IGNORE the hard questions surrounding 9-11---and yet HE DOES THE SAME THING-----IGNORES 90% of what i ask!!!! [as evidenced by the Jennings post] He does the VERY SAME THING that he puts me down for when i accuse the government and media of ignoring these hard 9-11 questions! Isnt that amazing?

the_last_name_left said...

L; not only is the liklihood of ONE black box not being found almost completely impossible, but ALL 4?????

Check GOVERNMENT EXHIBIT P20056T 01-455-A ID

You'll find it's a transcript of the CVR RECOVERED FROM FLT 93.

And if you go here, you'll find some pilots claiming to have had the data from the Flight Recorder of Flt93 GRANTED UNDER A FOIA REQUEST:
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/UA93_Press_Release.html

L: And you say it takes incredible faith to believe what I believe???????

You're jumping up and down about no blackboxes being recovered - when apparently the facts say otherwise.

L: To not question why they say NO black boxes were found is downright idiotic and lazy.

Errr - even when "they" don't even say it?

The top-secret stuff is even hidden at Wikipedia's page - recordings from Flight 93. How devious is that?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Airlines_Flight_93

L: First of all it means the FBI is blatantly LYING, because in 2002, it was reported that family members of Flight 93 actually got to hear about 30 minutes of the flight recorder/black box. So, if they had access to ONE of the black boxes in 2002---how could they have ZERO black boxes during the 9/11 investigation in 2004?? Thats a BLATANT lie. But you will say "hows it a lie?"

who says the FBI had ZERO black boxes in 2004? You.

Even Pilots for 911 Truth (whoever they are) say

Pilots for 9/11 Truth, an international organization of pilots and aviation professionals, petitioned the National Transportation and Safety Board (NTSB) via the Freedom of Information Act to obtain United Flight 93 Flight Data Recorder information, consisting of a Comma Separated Value (CSV) file and Flight Path Animation, allegedly derived from Flight 93 Flight Data Recorder (FDR). The data provided by the NTSB contradict observed events in several significant ways:

So, apparently, not only did "they" get the blackbox, "they" also dished out the data it held after a FOIA request.

Get the facts straight?

Finding the CVR - it's data is apparently fishy. Not finding it, well, that's fishy too.

The facts are apparently almost irrelevant.

It did happen - it didn't. Fishy whatever. It's just fishy - no matter whether the facts are 'xyz' or 'not xyz'.

the_last_name_left said...

L: it proves something is VERY wrong because black boxes are INDESTRUCTABLE.

no - they are not INDESTRUCTIBLE.

but why let a simple fact get in the way?

we already know it doesn't matter if they are indestructible or not insofar as it isn't going to make any difference to your view, is it? Just like it makes no difference, really, whether blackboxes were found or not. None of it really makes any difference....to you..does it?

L: HUH? They have found black boxes in planes that hit immovable SOLID structures like mountains---and yet they couldnt find them in 3 planes that hit manmade structures that were punctured and 1 that hit the ground [supposedly]

They did find the ground one, apparently. Flt 93

check GOVERNMENT EXHIBIT P20056T 01-455-A ID

The most obvious reason for loss of datarecorder at WTC is they were completely destroyed.

BY THE FORCE OF THE FALLING SKYSCRAPER

How many other blackboxes have been found in such circumstances?

What's our data? ZERO> ZILCH> NADA> NOTHING

There's nothing to build on here. There's just the simple fact that the blackboxes have apparently not been found, presumably destroyed.

There's absolutely no reason to necessarily include the lack of blackboxes at WTC as positive evidence FOR a conspiracy.

Especially when the datarecorder was found for one of the other planes, Flt93.

But the facts clearly don't matter much, do they? You reach the same conclusion whatever the facts are.

L: What does it prove??? A blatant cover-up.

No - it really doesn't. It's not remotely close to proving that. It doesn't even positively support that notion at all.

L: There is something those boxes reveal that does not match the official story. Could be:

Could be!

But you don't actually know.

And that's the point. which. you. seem. to. be. missing.

the_last_name_left said...

As for your question about "universal collapse", Larry, I brought up the McCormick thus:
-----------------------

From August 2009:

I quoted you asking the question:

Larrry: name ONE building that has ever suffered a UNIVERSAL COLLAPSE when damaged by objects or fires---name ONE. Note: I said UNIVERSAL collapse---meaning the whole fucking building, straight to the ground. Name ONE....ONE.


To which I added the following:

Well, the logical rebuttal of this argument is there has to be a first time.

And of course, steel buildings have previously collapsed due to fire. This for example

The steel framed McCormick Center was at the time the World's largest exhibition center. It like the WTC used long steel trusses to create a large open space without columns. Those trusses were unprotected but of course much of the WTC lost it's fire protection due to the impacts.

"As an example of the damaging effect of fire on steel, in 1967, the original heavy steel-constructed McCormick Place exhibition hall in Chicago collapsed only 30 minutes after the start of a small electrical fire."

http://www.wconline.com/CDA/Archive/24ae78779d768010VgnVCM100000f932a8c0____

[Note this article has several comments from engineers who back the WTC collapse theory.]

"The unprotected steel roof trusses failed early on in the fire"

http://www.chipublib.org/004chicago/disasters/mccormick_fire.html


The McCormick Place fire "is significant because it illustrates the fact that steel-frame buildings can collapse as a result of exposure to fire. This is true for all types of construction materials, not only steel." wrote Robert Berhinig, associate manager of UL's Fire Protection Division and a registered professional engineer. He also discusses UL's steel fire certification much more knowledgably than Kevin Ryan. He is an example of one more highly qualified engineer who supports the collapse theory.


But don't let an expert tell you, huh? You're an architect, right?



3 August 2009 00:50

socrates said...

A recovery worker named Bellone says he saw one of the black boxes. Also, there were a number of witnesses who heard explosions in the bottom of the building, before the plane hit. I'm not looking for sophistry. Not saying you're doing that on purpose. But I'll take it as a concession that you're trying to separate troofiness from specific details, that you see there is the chance of some debunkers falling into the conflation trap. Just keep your mind open. It's not your job to debunk 9/11 any more than you have. Not saying to stop. You're a free man and all that. Just saying there are some focked up anomalies to 9/11, same as with a lot of stuff. As individuals we can't figure out everything. We do what we can and hope everything comes out in the wash.

socrates said...

Larry, if you want to play a logic game, you're the one who said myself and Joe from East Buttfock, New Jersey are the only people reading this blog. So why are you here? I figure blogspots do well in the search engines. I picked a bunch of subjects I am good at, and I have found the way to get my message out. If I lose out on Alex Jones type wingnuts like yourself, it's no biggie.

socrates said...

I also notice TLNL, that you never seem to answer all my questions, when you respond. Like here, you zoomed in on the black box issue, and that's all you attempted to resolve. And you failed at that due to not seeming to know about Mr. Bellone. Here, I'll give you the answer of what to say. It looks like he is writing a book and trying to make a buck. I've seen how debunkers work. They have an answer for everything. There is tunnel vision on both sides. You're better than this. What about Jones finding the explosive residue or how the steel, the evidence was gotten rid of. There are tons of anomalies. Debunking 9/11 and troofiness are two separate issues. I think you have locked yourself in to debunking it. It takes a real man to say I'm not sure. Your response to the idea of the black box counters what you said when we went over the passport found. At least with that one, you admitted it was odd. Is there a standard response to the witnesses who heard explosions way below?

socrates said...

Maybe there is some confusion here with the black boxes. There are two boxes to each plane. The only ones that are in question, from my view, are the ones from New York. A recovery worker called Bellone claims to have seen one of them, and three were recovered, but the FBI is covering it up. Apparently some air traffic controllers have heard what was on one of them but are scared to come forward. Thus Bellone is either a grifter or is a big chunk to the story. I do see your point Larry that when TLNl gets going like this, he doesn't always answer every question from the other side. But I don't think he's doing it on purpose.

Larry said...

"Errr - even when "they" don't even say it?"

Oh really? Here is a clip of FBI agent Jack Cloonan from Jesse Ventura's show Conspiracy Theory where Ventura asks Cloonan, "Then where are they [black boxes]?" Cloonan's response: "I DONT KNOW WHERE THEY ARE"

Its at 7:05 in the clip---I suggest you watch it. I guess the FBI saying they never found them is unimportnat to you and that doesnt constitute REAL evidence, huh?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__Yo7koTTDA&feature=player_embedded

"who says the FBI had ZERO black boxes in 2004? You."

AND Jack Cloonan

"They did find the ground one, apparently. Flt 93"

God, you are fucking MORON. MY ENTIRE POINT IS---YES, they DID find them---but they later said they DID NOT FIND THEM---get it now??? Jack Cloonan said ON CAMERA to Jesse Ventura "I DONT KNOW WHERE THEY ARE". That PROVES they are NOW saying they never found them. I believe they DID find them and they DO know where they are----but they are SAYING they dont know-----see the difference??? God, I hope so.

"Could be!

But you don't actually know.

And that's the point. which. you. seem. to. be. missing."

Yes! Because there has NEVER been a REAL goddamned investigation and because n one wants to answer HARD questions! Thats why! So, your claim that "I dont know" the answer is PROOF there is not a cover-up? The fact that we "dont know" is proof it was NOT investigated--and the lack of a REAL investigation is the symptom of a cover-up. My god, why do I have to explain this to you?

Answer this question [and dont fucking ignore it!]:

Do you believe the story that surfaced after 9-11 happened that one of the hijackers' passports was found on the street by an FBI agent? You realize that is a part of the official story, right? So, answer----do you believe a hijackers' passport was found on the street? Its very important that you answer that.

Here's the funny part!:

You first claimed that the McCormick Center was LIKE building 7, then when I debunked you and said that the MC was NOT a universal collapse, you said THIS [on this very same thread]:

"The McCormick was not a structure like the WTC....."

You said on your 22:10 post on Jan 24 "...was NOT a structure like the WTC..."---but you said months ago AND just now re-posted:

"The steel framed McCormick Center was at the time the World's largest exhibition center. It like the WTC used long steel trusses to create a large open space without columns. Those trusses were unprotected but of course much of the WTC lost it's fire protection due to the impacts."

"It LIKE THE WTC USED long steel trusses....."

When you want to disprove what Im saying, you say it's "LIKE the WTC 7"---then when I debunk you, you say its "NOT a structure like the WTC..."-----THEN in your profound retardation, you copy and paste and old post you sent to me saying the MC is "LIKE the WTC" because it has long steel trusses.

Its like WTC 7---its NOT like WTC 7---its LIKE it again----JESUS, you must have whiplash from your flip-flopping!!

The MC did NOT collapse STRAIGHT DOWN in perfect symmetry----just the ROOF did---I saw pictures of it dipshit. It was JUST the ROOF. It was a HUGE roof, but it was JUST the roof. The outer walls remained standing----thus, NOT a universal collapse. A retarded monkey would understand this, but you not only want to keep debating it---but you post and re-post flip-flopping, contradictory comments.

Was it LIKE WTC 7 or NOT like it?

PICK ONE!

Socrates----cant you see where TLNL has said opposite things about the McCormick Center? He said it was LIKE WTC 7 and NOT like it too. If thats not disinfo, what is????

Larry said...

"I do see your point Larry that when TLNL gets going like this, he doesn't always answer every question from the other side. But I don't think he's doing it on purpose."

Are you kidding me Socrates?? NOT doing it on purpose? Apparently you havent seen too many of our threads. Know how many times I had to ask that dipshit about the McCormick Center before he actually mentioned it on this thread? It goes back to 2009---thats how long!

When he IGNORES something over and over and over again, you say its not on purpose? Was that a joke? TLNL will not address Barry Jennings hearing the explosions and seeing the damage, because it COMPLETELY goes against his view that the debris from the twin towers created that damage---DESPITE the fact that Jennings' story did not change ONE BIT from the day of 9-11 to 2007 when he was interviewed by the Loose Change crew.

What TLNL doesnt want to come to grips with is the fact that there are MANY anomolies of 9-11---WAY too many for him to act as if there is NO cover up. My stance has always been: If theres not ONE thing to hide, then why isnt EVERY question being answered by the government? Why isnt every question even allowed to be asked? The 9-11 commission was a total whitewash from day one. If there is nothing strange or worthy to ask about WTC 7----then tell me why it was not mentioned ONCE in the entire 9-11 commission? Why??

Why is there even ONE anomoly about 9-11 TLNL???? According to you, there is not ONE odd thing about that day and theres absolutely NO cover-up-----BUT, to this day:

*we are STILL not allowed to see ANY of the footage from the 80+ cameras that captured the Pentagon attack

*If the black boxes have been found [as YOU claim], why have they NEVER been played to the American people on TV? Why cant we hear them? Why cant we SEE them?

*Why has there NEVER been a complete 100% INDEPENDANT investigation of 9-11? I will remind you the whitewash investigation that took place in 2004 consisted of people hand picked by Bush---even the guy who led the entire thing Philip Zelikow, was a white house employee for 20 years. Thats NOT independant.

*Why has there been so many 9-11 hit pieces that completely and blatantly LIE and distort the facts?

*Why are people automatically branded nutcases and 'kooks' for simply ASKING questions about 9-11? We can ask all the questions we want about the anomolies in the OJ Simpson murder case and thats completely OK----no one's a "nut" for asking about that---but asking about 9-11? Instant NUT! Why??

*Why has the FBI STILL not indicted Bin Laden for 9-11? Why do they STILL not blame him for 9-11 on their own website?

*Why did official story defenders Popular Mechanics blatantly LIE and say they recovered DNA of the hijackers at ground zero---and when asked where they got the original DNA to match it, panic like scared rabbits and AVOID answering the question?? YouTube "Charles Goyette/Davin Coburn" and listen to the interview and listen to Coburn PANIC when he asked that question. Why do people panic if they are the truth tellers? Why do people blatantly LIE if they have the truth? Hmmmm?

*Why do bootlicking hacks like YOU constantly IGNORE questions that are asked of you? Why do you lie, spin, twist and distort facts----copy and paste partial segments of quotes and leave out the MAIN POINT people are asking you in a clear attempt to dodge and deflect from the main issue?

Remember, it is not required to KNOW WHO exactly the perpetrators ARE to know a cover-up is taking place. Like I said before, if I see a man laying down on the street and he's been shot, I dont need to know WHO shot him to know he was shot. According to YOU, I would be a "NUT" if I asked who shot him--and if the shooting was covered up by the police, it would be wrong and "nutty" of me to SUSPECT the police---right?

the_last_name_left said...

I've addressed all your rubbish Larrrrry, over and over again.

You don't like the answers I give? You disagree?

Fine - good for you.

the_last_name_left said...

I know about Bellone.

He *says* xyz.

Do you have any other evidence for what Bellone claims? no.

And what was in the flight recorders the FBI apparently have but are supposedly denying they have?

You don't know.

But don't let that stop you?

-----

S: What about Jones finding the explosive residue

Jones is an idiot. HE got SENT some powder - supposedly collected from windowsills and a bridge on Manhattan. Nobody knows the provenance of his "samples".

And do his "samples" contain "explosive residue"?

I don't see why you believe that.

Jones had his "research" published in a vanity publishing periodical - in which people PAY TO BE PUBLISHED! you think that's believable?

If you want to stand up for Jones' "scientific work" - claiming there's explosive residue found in his samples - that's up to you. I don't see why you just assume he's right.

how the steel, the evidence was gotten rid of.

What were they supposed to do with it? Leave it there?

The steel WAS examined - engineers chose steel to look at. They looked at 000s of pieces. They don't have to look at every piece......it is crazy to imagine they would, could or should.

And like the blackboxes - what does any of this actually prove? nothing. nothing - at all.

S: I do see your point Larry that when TLNl gets going like this, he doesn't always answer every question from the other side.

There isn't one new issue here - I've addressed all this before. Not that it matters becuse when people are determined to believe something apparently nothing will stop them.

I mean - what is the issue here?

Is it that the blackboxes were found - or is the issue that the boxes were not found?

Which is it?

the_last_name_left said...

Here's 911 hero, Mike Bellone - he of the "I found the blackboxes" claims:

B. Mike Bellone - Mike Bellone was a grocery store clerk who had friends in the fire department in New York at the time of 9/11. To his credit, Bellone volunteered to help with the recovery effort and worked for a long time driving around on an ATV at Ground Zero. But ever since then, Bellone, like Rodriguez, did everything he could to keep from going back to punching a clock after 9/11; to turn a profit off of his involvement in the clean-up at Ground Zero. In fact, Bellone and a few of his buddies set up a charity where they go around to different schools, dressed up in fireman gear (that Bellone stole from the NYFD), acting like they are teaching kids how to deal with “terrorism” or other traumatic events. He was arrested for stealing the gear from the fire department, for running up huge bills in the name of his “charity” (not registered in the state) and skipping out on the tabs, and for impersonating a fire department official. His website is still up and running, and as recently as Sept. of this year, he is still running his “Freedom Fields” scam where he and his “charity” go out and plant a flag for people in a field at a charge of $30 per flag… all to raise money… for his “charity”. In one of the pictures, you can see Mike Bellone and his “team” in between their two big black official looking SUVs with their “Freedom Field” in the background.
----------

A New York charity that runs a traveling exhibit of Ground Zero “artifacts” – including part of a plane, pieces of destroyed buildings and earrings, shoes and eyeglasses belonging to victims – is under investigation by city fire marshals, The Post has learned… And Fire Department brass has warned the group – which won’t say where or how it obtained many items – to stop claiming ties to FDNY and dressing in its uniforms…”This group has no right to imply it works for or acts in any official FDNY capacity,” Billig said. They are “not authorized to wear Fire Department uniforms.”…TRAC doesn’t charge for appearances and relies on sales of a self-published book and souvenirs – such as shirts, patches and snow globes carrying the FDNY logo – for revenue… But, Bellone said, “Our hosts, if they can afford it, pay our room and board.”

TRAC’s troubles might run deeper than the exhibit investigation.

The Post has learned that the group:

* Owes New Jersey graphics company ADP $200,000 for printing its self-published book about Ground Zero.

* Stiffed a company that provided the American flags TRAC hands out to local dignitaries.

* Left a cross-country trail of more than $20,000 in unpaid bills, including hotel rooms, flights, FDNY shirts, business cards and even prescription drugs.

The Post spoke to four former TRAC business associates who said they felt “used” by the group after it “misrepresented” itself and left unpaid bills.

“I put my reputation on the line for this group, and believed in it,” said one. “But the truth is, they play on people’s emotions and good will, manipulating them where they’re most vulnerable for nothing but their own gain.”

Bellone conceded TRAC owes money, but chalked some of it up to “miscommunications” and “mix-ups” and said, “We’ve either paid or are working to pay off all our bills.”… New York Post
------------

the_last_name_left said...

And here's some Willis Carto - hell, why not?

Jesse Ventura Reveals Black Box Mystery

http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/black_box_204.html

By Victor Thorn

Former Minnesota Gov. Jesse Ventura’s Dec. 9 broadcast of Conspiracy Theory ended with a major disclosure. Not only did recovery and rescue worker Mike Bellone reiterate earlier 2004 claims that the FBI had recovered three of the four “black boxes” from Ground Zero of the World Trade Center, but he also quoted a supervisor for American Airlines Flight 11.

This woman monitored the actual live transmissions emanating from this airliner; and according to her, the “hijackers” were already in the plane’s cockpit prior to takeoff. Further, she claimed others on the ground were fully aware of this situation while Flight 11 taxied on the runway, and they still allowed it to take off.

Initially, Bellone promised to produce this employee for Ventura, but she declined an interview at the last minute out of fear for her life. After having her house, car and cell phone bugged, federal officials frightened her into not talking. Bellone also divulged that FBI officials told him not to discuss this matter with the media.

the_last_name_left said...

L: Here is a clip of FBI agent Jack Cloonan from Jesse Ventura's show Conspiracy Theory where Ventura asks Cloonan, "Then where are they [black boxes]?" Cloonan's response: "I DONT KNOW WHERE THEY ARE"

Listen to the clip? They are talking about the blackboxes at the WTC.

Cloonan says "I DON'T KNOW WHERE THEY ARE"..........

So....he doesn't know where the (4) WTC blackboxes are.

That fits the facts as they're known - that the WTC blackboxes were not found at WTC - but Flight93's were found.

Cloonan seems (obviously) to be saying he doesn't know where the WTC boxes are.

So - no contradiction there - at all.

the_last_name_left said...

It's kinda funny that you take just this one sentence from this FBI dude, Cloonan, and turn it into "proof of a coverup".

Nevermind that you misunderstood what he was on about. What's more interesting is that you take this one sentence from some former FBI dude.....and treat it as the official word of the FBI.....and that because (you mistakenly thought) it contradicted other FBI statements.......then there must be a cover-up, conspiracy, etc.

You seem to treat this Cloonan dude with soooo much respect - you completely believe his word over everything else......on just this one single sentence though. Nothing else?

Nevermind Cloonan has been hunting Al Q since 1995?

One sentence of Cloonan's (which you misunderstand) is the GOSPEL....apparently. But his professional work hunting Al Q and all his pronouncements on the real threat of AQ are......worthless lies?

How strange? Not really - it's troof.

Larry said...

Isnt it interesting that you claim I took one snippet out of what Cloonan said and ignored the rest, when you did the EXACT SAME THING---as you ALWAYS do. You only addressed the black box issue out of EVERYTHING I said in my two posts above your recent ones---and IGNORED what I said about WTC 7, McCormick, Jennings, and the fact that I pointed out your complete contradiction of saying the McCormick Center was "like WTC 7" and then saying it was "NOT like it"--I love how you COMPLETELY ignored your own flip-flopping----oh, and you also COMPLETELY ignored the question that I implored that you NOT ignore. This one:

"Answer this question [and dont fucking ignore it!]:

Do you believe the story that surfaced after 9-11 happened that one of the hijackers' passports was found on the street by an FBI agent? You realize that is a part of the official story, right? So, answer----do you believe a hijackers' passport was found on the street? Its very important that you answer that."

Gonna address your flip-flopping on saying the MC was "LIKE WTC 7" and then "NOT like it" and answer my question about the passport? Or going to conveniently IGNORE them again?

You said:

"I've addressed all your rubbish Larrrrry, over and over again.

You don't like the answers I give? You disagree?

Fine - good for you."

Oh really? You addressed the FACT that Jennings' story never changed once in 6 years? Really?

You addressed your flip-flopping? You addressed THIS?:

"You first claimed that the McCormick Center was LIKE building 7, then when I debunked you and said that the MC was NOT a universal collapse, you said THIS [on this very same thread]:

"The McCormick was not a structure like the WTC....."

You said on your 22:10 post on Jan 24 "...was NOT a structure like the WTC..."---but you said months ago AND just now re-posted:

"The steel framed McCormick Center was at the time the World's largest exhibition center. It like the WTC used long steel trusses to create a large open space without columns. Those trusses were unprotected but of course much of the WTC lost it's fire protection due to the impacts."

"It LIKE THE WTC USED long steel trusses....."

When you want to disprove what Im saying, you say it's "LIKE the WTC 7"---then when I debunk you, you say its "NOT a structure like the WTC..."-----THEN in your profound retardation, you copy and paste and old post you sent to me saying the MC is "LIKE the WTC" because it has long steel trusses.

Its like WTC 7---its NOT like WTC 7---its LIKE it again----JESUS, you must have whiplash from your flip-flopping!!"

I dont recall seeing you address that! So, you even LIE about addressing things when you havent!

Larry said...

See what I mean Socrates? TLNL is massive pile of disinfo bullshit!

Do you keep missing the fact that I am telling you that I PERSONALLY BELIEVE [like YOU do] that ALL 4 black boxes have been recovered? The difference is: I am telling you that NOW they [the FBI] are saying that none were recovered/or at the very least recovered but too damaged to be useful----and YOU are saying that all 4 were recovered and are sitting in some FBI vault somewhere, ready to be analyzed by anyone who requests to see them. If they were all available and ready to go----why are they not putting this on TV? Why cant we see them? Why did the FBI say "I DONT KNOW WHERE THEY ARE"?? Why is it considered "kooky" to ask these questions?

Why did Popular Mechanics say they found DNA of the hijackers at ground zero and when they were asked where they got the DNA to match it---why did they panic like a frightened school girl?

Even IF that guy was JUST talking about the black boxes at the WTC site, that STILL destroys YOUR view that they were ALL found---right? You have repeatedly told us that you believe they were ALL recovered. Well, "ALL" would INCLUDE the 2 at the WTC site-----right? Yet, you ADMITTED that you believed Cloonan was ONLY talking about the WTC black boxes---and he is saying he doesnt know where they are-----and YOU believe they were ALL recovered.

Well, doesnt Cloonan's statement contradict YOUR belief that they ALL were found???? That will be ignored too--no doubt!

Larry said...

You posted a link from American Free Press and said "heres some Willis Carto, why not?" and then proceeded to post an article by Victor Thorn.

So, Willis Carto and Thorn are the same person? LOL. Just like Jones and Carto are the same person? Just like Ron Paul and the 2 storm front guys were the same person?

Funny how you have COMPLETELY IGNORED my comment in my most recent posted story on my site---because it completely flies in the face of your attempt to associate me with Pat Robertson---since my post at my site talks about a guy who believes in global warming supporting genocide in a book he wrote. YOU said you didnt support genocide, right? Well, the guy who wrote this book does--and he believes in global warming.

So, isnt it fair to say [using YOUR logic] that if a guy who wrote a book supporting genocide believes in global warming---that means YOU support genocide TOO? Sounds absurd right? But thats EXACTLY what you did to me over the Robertson post I posted. THATS why youre AFRAID to post on my site under that story!!!! LOL

Larry said...

By the way TLNL, if I were you, Id stop copying and pasting from other sites and letting them do the thinking for you WITHOUT doing any real investigation. That's what led you to your complete contradiction in saying the McCormick Center was "LIKE wtc 7..." then "NOT like wtc 7...".

Your total lack of investigating skills are making you flip-flop your beliefs---know why? Because when you simply copy and paste and parrot OTHER people's shit, you have to have a pristine memory when you rely on the words of OTHERS when you are doing no REAL investigation of your own.

Larry said...

I read your copy and paste stuff on Bellone. The very first question that came to mind after reading it was:

"What is the connective link between Bellone being a scam artist/profitting from 9/11 and revealing that he physically saw the black boxes at ground zero?"

My point is, how is Bellone benefitting from telling people he saw black boxes? How does that HELP his scam? Couldnt he STILL be the SAME scam artist and profiteer from 9-11 if he HADNT claimed he saw black boxes?

Id really like to know your point in copying and pasting that. What is the link between scam artist and whistleblower of the black boxes? How do the two descriptions help each other? Isnt this the same tactic people use when they suggest that since Charlie Sheen is a womanizer, then he cant be right about 9-11???

Please DO tell what your point was. Whats the connective link?

And please, dont come back and say "It proves that since he's a scam artist, then he's lying about the black boxes". I am SPECIFICALLY asking you: How does his whistleblowing about the black boxes HELP his scam? He couldnt profit from 9-11 if he HADNT whistleblew the black box sighting?

Whats the link???

the_last_name_left said...

Man, you're one nut, Larrrry.

L: Even IF that guy was JUST talking about the black boxes at the WTC site, that STILL destroys YOUR view that they were ALL found---right?

My view that they were ALL found?

haha

don't go inventing my opinion, Larry.


Re Bellone:

L: Isnt this the same tactic people use when they suggest that since Charlie Sheen is a womanizer, then he cant be right about 9-11???

don't be silly. If Sheen was talking about domestic violence it might well be relevant to mention his own brushes with the law and accusations of wife-battery.

Bellone has a string of charges against him - relating to his honesty -- and his being a scam artist whom uses 911 to exploit people.

You don't think that's relevant to his claims about having found the black boxes?

Fine.

You go on believing this one bloke.....and continue basing an entire massive conspiracy and a political conception around it........good luck.

Believe whatever you like, Larry.

the_last_name_left said...

L: How does his whistleblowing about the black boxes HELP his scam?

Gee, I wonder.

And why is it of such interest to Willis Carto?

Maybe a connection between those answers? Gee - what could it be?

In the middle ages weren't there hundreds of fingers of Christ locked in various church vaults around Europe?

It must be true then that Christ had several hundreds of fingers. Gosh.

Troofers refuse to cleanse their "movement" of all the doozies. Because there'd be almost no-one left. hehe

Larry said...

"Man, you're one nut, Larrrry."

BRILLIANT refutation assface!

As I figured---you couldnt answer SIMPLE questions I ask. ALL of my questions were IGNORED---and you WONDER why 9-11 truthers complain there's a cover-up! Even insignificant people like YOU ignore questions---stands to reason even GOVERNMENTS will too!

Socrates----did you notice how many things I asked him that he completely IGNORED???


I will remind TLNL what he IGNORED, since he is STILL in the business of diverting away from HARD questions he refuses to answer and HARD statements he CONTINUALLY fails to address:

1) "You first claimed that the McCormick Center was LIKE building 7, then when I debunked you and said that the MC was NOT a universal collapse, you said THIS [on this very same thread]:

"The McCormick was not a structure like the WTC....."

You said on your 22:10 post on Jan 24 "...was NOT a structure like the WTC..."---but you said months ago AND just now re-posted:

"The steel framed McCormick Center was at the time the World's largest exhibition center. It like the WTC used long steel trusses to create a large open space without columns. Those trusses were unprotected but of course much of the WTC lost it's fire protection due to the impacts."

"It LIKE THE WTC USED long steel trusses....."

When you want to disprove what Im saying, you say it's "LIKE the WTC 7"---then when I debunk you, you say its "NOT a structure like the WTC..."-----THEN in your profound retardation, you copy and paste and old post you sent to me saying the MC is "LIKE the WTC" because it has long steel trusses.

Its like WTC 7---its NOT like WTC 7---its LIKE it again----JESUS, you must have whiplash from your flip-flopping!!"

2) Do you believe the story that surfaced after 9-11 happened that one of the hijackers' passports was found on the street by an FBI agent? You realize that is a part of the official story, right? So, answer----do you believe a hijackers' passport was found on the street? Its very important that you answer that."

3) Why did Popular Mechanics say they found DNA of the hijackers at ground zero and when they were asked where they got the DNA to match it---why did they panic like a frightened school girl?

4) So, Willis Carto and Thorn are the same person? LOL. Just like Jones and Carto are the same person? Just like Ron Paul and the 2 storm front guys were the same person?

5) Funny how you have COMPLETELY IGNORED my comment in my most recent posted story on my site---because it completely flies in the face of your attempt to associate me with Pat Robertson---since my post at my site talks about a guy who believes in global warming supporting genocide in a book he wrote. YOU said you didnt support genocide, right? Well, the guy who wrote this book does--and he believes in global warming.

So, isnt it fair to say [using YOUR logic] that if a guy who wrote a book supporting genocide believes in global warming---that means YOU support genocide TOO? Sounds absurd right? But thats EXACTLY what you did to me over the Robertson post I posted. THATS why youre AFRAID to post on my site under that story!!!! LOL

6) "What is the connective link between Bellone being a scam artist/profitting from 9/11 and revealing that he physically saw the black boxes at ground zero?"

My point is, how is Bellone benefitting from telling people he saw black boxes? How does that HELP his scam? Couldnt he STILL be the SAME scam artist and profiteer from 9-11 if he HADNT claimed he saw black boxes? How does his whistleblowing about the black boxes HELP his scam? He couldnt profit from 9-11 if he HADNT whistleblew the black box sighting?

Whats the link???

Larry said...

“Gee, I wonder” is NOT an answer to my question about Bellone. It’s actually an avoidance of it.

Surely, someone who has the TRUTH like you CLAIM you do will not keep IGNORING these questions and statements, right???

Numbers 1, 2 and 5 are the ones I REALLY want addressed. I want them all addressed really, but I know since your brain can only address ONE thing at a time [AT THE RARE TIMES YOU DO ADDRESS THINGS] I thought Id make it easy. Try hard to address the main 3---try real, REAL hard-----or will you simply just IGNORE again and again and again? And then you have the NERVE to DENY that Socrates is WRONG when even HE says you IGNORE questions???? This entire thread is visible PROOF you do!

Larry said...

I forgot:

7) How do you explain NO DEBRIS at the Flight 93 crash site on 9-11? Even people that were there said they saw NO debris. Do you believe the planes vaporized TLNL????

the_last_name_left said...

I'll address them yet again.

But don't expect anyone to take your guaranteed future whinging about "avoiding questions" seriously.

--------

1) X being "like" Y does not mean X is identical to Y.

No, the McCormick building and its collapse was not "identical" to the WTC. No-one said it was.

But McCormick is "like" WTC because it was steel building - which collapased because of fire.

The point was to illustrate how steel buildings *can* collapse from fire.

(Un)fortunately we don't have a data pool of buildings identical to WTC which suffered identical conditions from which to draw any conclusions - so we are forced to use "likenesses" - not "identical" situations.

The WTC which suffered damage and fire but which never "fully collapsed" a la WTC7 were not identical to WTC7 - nor did they suffer identical conditions.

You like to insist that the other WTC should have collapsed, because WTC7 did. Even though they weren't identical - only somewhat alike.

Funny - you don't mind claiming "likeness" as a strong argument when it suits you.

2) L: 2) Do you believe the story that surfaced after 9-11 happened that one of the hijackers' passports was found on the street by an FBI agent?

Here you go again. Inventing stuff.

Who found the passport, Larry?

Why need I answer questions whose premises are so flawed?

And we've been through this before, Im sure. Regardless, a half-burnt passport surviving the plane crash seems incredible. But.......lots of things seem incredible. So what?

the_last_name_left said...

3) L: 3) Why did Popular Mechanics say they found DNA of the hijackers at ground zero and when they were asked where they got the DNA to match it---why did they panic like a frightened school girl?

We've been through this before too.

The hijackers had hotel rooms, apartments, etc.

Places where they lived. No problem to get DNA.

L: 4) So, Willis Carto and Thorn are the same person? LOL. Just like Jones and Carto are the same person? Just like Ron Paul and the 2 storm front guys were the same person?

No - the point is Willis Carto publishes the crap you believe.

Or put another - you believe the crap Willis Carto publishes.

Of course, Carto might occasionally publish an honest fact or two........but the point still holds and is worth making: Carto finds publishing such stuff to his benefit.

the_last_name_left said...

L: 5) Funny how you have COMPLETELY IGNORED my comment in my most recent posted story on my site---because it completely flies in the face of your attempt to associate me with Pat Robertson---since my post at my site talks about a guy who believes in global warming supporting genocide in a book he wrote. YOU said you didnt support genocide, right? Well, the guy who wrote this book does--and he believes in global warming.

I haven't read your comment.

And.....now you're flogging that tired old canard about Holdgren, is it? Obama's science czar? And how his writing about possible methods for population control mean he must agree with them - and therefore is genocidal?

What a load of old shit.

You don't even understand the difference between describing something and believing in it.

L: 6) "What is the connective link between Bellone being a scam artist/profitting from 9/11 and revealing that he physically saw the black boxes at ground zero?"

My point is, how is Bellone benefitting from telling people he saw black boxes?


It's called MONEY, Larrrry.

Look - you can say anything you like about FBI, CIA, whatever......

I was told by the FBI to lay-off debunking 911......because 911 Troof helps keep people confused and unaware of the real issues.

See? Easy.

And they threatened to take away my blueprints for a car that runs only on catfood.

Send this plea out to all your Troofy friends........truth is under attack......liberty is on her knees.....the answer to all our ills is being suppressed! The NWO is on the march.......

GEt the Troof TShirt - the most important TShirt you'll ever buy! Only $9.99

the_last_name_left said...

L: 7) How do you explain NO DEBRIS at the Flight 93 crash site on 9-11? Even people that were there said they saw NO debris. Do you believe the planes vaporized TLNL????

No debris?

Apart from a great hole in the ground - in which they found.......the flight recorder, for example?

And evidence of an explosion.

You know other Troofers make claims that there was debris scattered so widely it suggests a shootdown or mid-air explosion?

Clearly, two different things couldn't have both happened.....and yet people believe each of them - passionately.

-------------

After 8 years, there's still not a single good piece of positive evidence for "inside job".

One surely has to begin to wonder where the passionate belief in such a conspiracy comes from.

It obviously doesn't come from the strength of the evidence - although believers like to claim it does, of course.

the_last_name_left said...

So - now my turn, Larry?

You haven't answered these questions since July or August 09 when I first asked them of you.

Why don't you answer them, for once?

1) Are you an architect?

2) who what when how - for "controlled demolition of WTC"?

Larry said...

"No, the McCormick building and its collapse was not "identical" to the WTC. No-one said it was."

I never claimed you used the word "identical"-----YOU inserted that word to make it appear as if I did say it---I didnt. More disinfo and dishonesty. I was merely pointing out that on 2 different occasions, you said 2 OPPOSITE things: It was LIKE wtc 7---then it was NOT like it.

NOW you are LYING and trying to make it appear as if you was interchanging how it collapsed with how its made---and that is NOT what you were saying prior to now. But naturally, the ONLY way you can address your answer is to add SPIN and DISTORTION----nice job!

You called the MC a UNIVERSAL collapse---and it wasnt. That was the ONLY reason the MC was brought into the discussion--because YOU said it was a UNIVERSAL collapse----it wasnt.

Were you drunk when you said this?:

"The WTC which suffered damage and fire but which never "fully collapsed" a la WTC7 were not identical to WTC7 - nor did they suffer identical conditions.

You like to insist that the other WTC should have collapsed, because WTC7 did. Even though they weren't identical - only somewhat alike."

I need an interpreter----it was plain mumbo jumbo.

"Here you go again. Inventing stuff.

Who found the passport, Larry?

Why need I answer questions whose premises are so flawed?

And we've been through this before, Im sure. Regardless, a half-burnt passport surviving the plane crash seems incredible. But.......lots of things seem incredible. So what?"

Oh but its not. The passport was found by an FBI agent [supposedly]---its the official story---which YOU accept. The reason I asked it is this: You believe the official story, The official story says that an FBI agent found a partially charred passport on the street. I ask you this: How can a passport withstand an giant explosion---but indestructable black boxes cant???????

Hmmmmmmmmmmm?????????????

"The hijackers had hotel rooms, apartments, etc.

Places where they lived. No problem to get DNA."

Not only is it laughable that DNA could be recovered weeks later from smoldering rubble after a huge explosion, but do you realize how long that process would take? They already knew the identities of the hijackers the SAME DAY! How could they?? They found DNA but no black boxes???? Wow! You must still believe in Santa!

"No - the point is Willis Carto publishes the crap you believe."

And you have zero proof. Ive debunked you 10 fold----so youre giving Carto alot of credit! YOU believe the official story, which has more holes in it than your head!

Larry said...

"I haven't read your comment.

And.....now you're flogging that tired old canard about Holdgren, is it? Obama's science czar? And how his writing about possible methods for population control mean he must agree with them - and therefore is genocidal?"

Its not about Holdgren---but you already KNOW its not, dont you? Youve been to my site AFTER i posted that story---so you saw it. My sitemeter tells me youve been on it. You purposely typed Holdgrens name in order to make it appear you dont know what that story is about. Nice try, Mr Disinfo!

"My point is, how is Bellone benefitting from telling people he saw black boxes?

It's called MONEY, Larrrry."

Hmmmmmm. He makes money off of telling people he saw black boxes?? HOW? Hows that happen? He walks into a school and says "I saw the black boxes at ground zero" and he is handed a check?

You FAILED to answer how Bellone STILL couldnt have profitted even if he HADNT claimed he saw black boxes! Funny how you can claim hes in it for money, but you deny scientists are in the global warming scam for money! In other words, when you accept an agenda, money cant possibly be the reason, but when you DONT accept an agenda, money is the motivation! Amazing!

"No debris?

Apart from a great hole in the ground - in which they found.......the flight recorder, for example?"

Funny, there was NO DEBRIS inside the hole! The flight recorder was NOT found at the hole. That would be silly to conclude it was found there since the PLANE wasnt there! If you believe the plane made that hole-----then your job is SIMPLE. Send me a link that shows a picture of the crashed plane at the crash site!! Ill be waiting.

"You haven't answered these questions since July or August 09 when I first asked them of you.

Why don't you answer them, for once?"

I havent answered them SINCE July or August??? So, you ADMIT that I HAVE answered them!! "For once?" You just said I answered them in July or August!!!!!! I LOVE IT! Are you retarded???

the_last_name_left said...

So - Larry still makes no attempt at answering the questions WHICH HE HAS FAILED TO ADDRESS SINCE JULY 09.

You never have answered those questions Larry.

You missed your last chance.

I've answered your questions as best I can - hundreds of em - over and over and over.

And you don't like my answers? - fine.

Don't expect more, as you're too dishonest to bother with.

You refuse to address anything - yet go on and on and on and on asking your own repeated questions.

Sorry - no play with such dishonesty. Game over.

socrates said...

I'm out of this one. Guys, all I ask is that you keep it entertaining.

It's all about the consumer.
Joseph Dirt Jr.

Larry said...

"I've answered your questions as best I can - hundreds of em - over and over and over.

And you don't like my answers? - fine."

Because theyre NOT answers!!

Saying "Gee, I wonder" is NOT an answer to how Bellone is profitting from saying there was black boxes at ground zero!

Naturally, since you were fucking DESTROYED on the facts, you run and hide like a scared little sissy girl and proclaim "Sorry - no play with such dishonesty. Game over." WHO'S DISHONEST?????

And your faggoty freind Socrates plays pussy boy too by chickening out of reading your bullshit too and agreeing that you continually dodge, deflect and ignore things I say. ADDRESSING or ACKNOWLEDING a question or statement is NOT necessarily ANSWERING it.

For example, I could ask you "Who's your favorite football team?" and you could respond back and say "Football is an overrated sport". You acknowledged it, but you didnt ANSWER it! That is EXACTLY what you do, over and over and over again---and then you CLAIM you answer questions.

THEN, you say shit like "You haven't answered these questions since July or August 09" and then claim I DIDNT answer them in the next sentence when you JUST said I DID answer them in July/August of -09!!

Why dont you just ADMIT that you were DESTROYED by a 9-11 truther???? You know deep down that I have destroyed you by your open admittance that I HAVE answered questions and your refusal to answer mine. You KNOW youre not answering my questions, you dont really need me to say it. A fact is a fact regardless if it's said out loud.

Im surprised you didnt enable comment moderation again for like the --what--7th time so far?? LOL

Larry said...

Hey assface------How can a passport stay in tact after a huge explosion which is made with plastic/paper but an indestructable black box [which is BUILT to withstand crashes!!] cant withstand it???

Gonna keep ignoring that? YOU accept the official story----and the official story claims that an FBI agent found a passport from one of the hijackers on the street in NYC. If you accept the official story, you have to accept ALL of it, not in bits and pieces! So, please, answer the question. Also, answer the Bellone question too--since you never answered it.

I will keep asking you until you answer [or until you enable comment moderation---lol].

Larry said...

"It's called MONEY, Larrrry."

Hmmmmmm. He makes money off of telling people he saw black boxes?? HOW? Hows that happen? He walks into a school and says "I saw the black boxes at ground zero" and he is handed a check?

You FAILED to answer how Bellone STILL couldnt have profitted even if he HADNT claimed he saw black boxes! Funny how you can claim hes in it for money, but you deny scientists are in the global warming scam for money! In other words, when you accept an agenda, money cant possibly be the reason, but when you DONT accept an agenda, money is the motivation! Amazing!

the_last_name_left said...

L: Funny how you can claim hes in it for money, but you deny scientists are in the global warming scam for money

How do scientists make money from "the global warming scam"?

socrates said...

Larry's an Alex Jones-Jeff Rense type kook and wonders why no one cares what he thinks. That's riotous. Plus, only a reactionary, bigoted homosexual would call someone a faggot. That's a sign of self-hatred. Larry should seek some counseling. He's jumping around from Sept. 11th ct to global warming is a hoax. Yawn. TLNL, if you started deleting this guy for being a right wing troll, I wouldn't think less of you. Free speech is one thing. But this guy is clearly an unhinged whackjob.

Larry said...

Yeah, Socrates, and the fact that you still support this giant pile of disinfo shit, makes you an agent of disinfo as well--it also proves you dont read ANY of my posts. If you did, youd CLEARLY see how many things TLNL omits, distorts and blatantly lies about---AND flip-flops about!

socrates said...

Dude, we were outed as Mossad and the same person years ago. Get with the program.

You've a filthy mouth. I wasn't sure you were homosexual, not that there's anything wrong with that. I kind of remembered you outing yourself on your website, but I'm not sure.

If you're gay, it's strange you would call someone a faggot. If you're not, then you are a homophobe and possible latent homosexual. You should really seek some counseling.

I mentioned something above about how TLNL doesn't always answer questions. I too have been annoyed by it in the past. But that doesn't mean he is paid to post.

Anyway, I've got better things to do than blog with a right wing conspiracy theorist with bad manners. You just don't get it. If you're going to be screaming and vulgar so often, most people are going to tune you out. It's not like you are that interesting a writer. And to be honest, you've been kissing Alex Jones' ass for years. You are what you are, a waste of time. The only people reading your blog are dumbass wingnuts. You even admitted that you write on an eigth grade level so newbies can read anything you write and follow it. Maybe go crawl back to Alex and apologise. Maybe then your blog can become relevant again in wingnut kook circles.

Larry said...

LOL----first of all, how is calling someone ELSE a faggot mean IM one??? LOL.

Speaking of vulgarities---I guess you didnt mind it last year when TLNL called me a "cunt". I guess faggot is MUCH worse than "cunt". And since he called me "cunt", I guess that means he HAS a cunt since he's saying Im one.

Its quite amusing that you would attempt to discredit me by calling me a "RIGHT wing" conspiracy theorist when, first of all, Im not RIGHT wing. I DID mention to you all the right wing people I CONDEMN on my site, dont I? Yes, I believe I did and you replied:

"Larry, I'll back off of my criticism of you. It was a knee-jerk reaction to defend my internet friend. He can defend himself."

You even ADMITTED you DEFEND TLNL---and since he is filled with just as much disinfo as he is with shit, that makes YOU an agent of disinfo as well.

You said:

"The only people reading your blog are dumbass wingnuts. You even admitted that you write on an eigth grade level so newbies can read anything you write and follow it"

LOL. Thats funny, I have nearly 50,000 hits on my site in just over 3 years. How many does TLNL have? Is he averaging ONE a DAY yet? I know he was only averaging 0.7 a DAY about 2 months ago. Is he up to ONE yet? LOL I get more hits in a week than he does in a YEAR.

I ADMITTED I write on an eighth grade level? Oh really? [by the way, you spelled "EIGHTH" wrong---LOL---what's that about eighth grade level? Eighth graders know how to SPELL "eighth", LOL] More DISINFO from the disinfo king. I believe THIS is what I said:

"You should write articles like I do, easy to follow as if theyve never been to your blog before."

I make it easy to follow. I dont just ASSUME my readers already know the story or the people Im talking about, because I may have readers reading my blog for the very FIRST time [since I do have nearly 50,000 hits in 3 years] and it cant be assumed that if Im writing about David McCullough or Lord Monckton, that they know who these people ARE! But YOU, you just start off your story where you left off the last one, completely confusing readers who come to your blog the very FIRST time! TLNL is not a writer either. He has no clue where to divide paragraphs, punctuate and not be redundant. He also writes about things NO ONE ELSE but YOU and HIM care about. Are you sure you and him arent sucking each other off? LOL

Are you going to keep defending him after he completely ignored, twisted, distorted and spun his way around my questions?

"Gee I wonder" is NOT answering the question of how Bellone PROFITS from saying he saw black boxes and how he couldnt still run scams even if he HADNT said he saw black boxes.

But, you and him, being the Lords of disinfo---that matters not, right? Call me any name in the book you want---you're just discrediting yourself when you do that, because if a "right wing conspiracy theorist" can debunk your claims and you ignore and cant answer MY claims, whats that make YOU??? DEFEATED by the "nut". LOL. Your pretending to be offended by my name-calling is just another of your diversion tactics I get ALL the time. When you cant debunk me and refuse to answer my excellent questions---you divert from it by acting "offended" because I said "asshole" "dickhead" or "fag". Nice try, but it doesnt work, fag. lol

Larry said...

He has 480 hits in TWO YEARS. I did the math. He is STILL at 0.7 hits a DAY! LOL. I bet in the last year, 1/3 of those hits were MINE!. LOL

Larry said...

He'd be reaching more people if he just yelled out his window every day. Im sure he'd reach at least 5 or 6 that way. At his blog, he's not even reaching ONE a day! LOL

socrates said...

Wow. Thanks for making it clear that you have a dislike for the gay and lesbian community. How very wingnuttery of you.

If you had half a brain, you'd realise that Europeans have a different cultural understanding of the "C" word.

Dude, you're definitely coming unhinged. If you don't like TLNL, then why not just go crawl back to your own place? And you are clearly a wingnut. You've been kissing Alex Jones' arse for years!

And Larry, if you're going to keep calling us disinfo, it'd be nice of you to include that we work for Mossad.

By the way, where you are getting the data that this blog is getting less than one hit a day. From a bong?

Sorry if I missed a typo. By the way, how come you don't use the apostrophe to mark letter omissions?

You talk a lot about "faggots" and people "sucking each other off." Are you sure you're not a latent homosexual?

Putting Freud to the Test by Henry L. Adams, et al.

Although the causes of homophobia are unclear, several psychoanalytic explanations have emerged from the idea of homophobia as an anxiety-based phenomenon. One psychoanalytic explanation is that anxiety about the possibility of being or becoming a homosexual may be a major factor in homophobia. For example, de Kuyper (1993) has asserted that homophobia is the result of the remnants of homosexuality in the heterosexual resolution of the Oedipal conflict. Whereas these notions are vague, psychoanalytic theories usually postulate that homophobia is a result of repressed homosexual urges or a form of latent homosexuality. Latent homosexuality can be defined as homosexual arousal which the individual is either unaware of or dent. Psychoanalysts use the concept of repressed or latent homosexuality to explain the emotional malaise and irrational attitudes displayed by some individuals who feel guilty about their erotic interests and struggle to deny and repress homosexual impulses....


Get yourself some counseling.

Larry said...

How convenient you ignored 90% of my posts---you're a spitting image of TLNL!!

"By the way, where you are getting the data that this blog is getting less than one hit a day. From a bong?"

On the front page of this website [if you can call it that---lol]---click on where it says: ABOUT ME/ VIEW MY COMPLETE PROFILE.

You will see it says 480 page views. TLNL made it sound like a page view and a HIT are two different things; theyre not. In FACT, even if they were different---a page view should be a HIGHER number than a HIT. So, if you wanna sit there and say theyre two different things----then youre admitting the hits are even a LESSER number than 480. Sorry, no bong here---I can simply READ, and do division.

ASSFACE. [I guess that means I like men's asses! LOL]

Larry said...

"Dude, you're definitely coming unhinged. If you don't like TLNL, then why not just go crawl back to your own place? And you are clearly a wingnut."

Uhhh, shithead----TLNL came to MY blog first!

CLEARLY a wingnut huh? There you go...discrediting yourself by saying IM the nut when you two cant debunk me and Ive caught you two in countless lies and disinfo [that you conveniently IGNORE]---so, are you admitting that the "wingnut" destroys you with facts so bad, that the only way you can retaliate is name-call? You say "clearly", yet dont give me ONE example, ONE FACT or shred of evidence that I AM a "wingnut". For you guys, if you just SAY it, it must be true, huh? No evidence required, right?

socrates said...

I knew you were talking out of your ass with that web counter nonsense. Profile hits don't mean squat.I just checked mine. It says 130. The only reason anyone would use it is to get to my two websites.

Ok, I'm checking out your website. You used to be a big fan of Alex Jones. There's a check in the wingnut category.

Your current entry says The Life and Times of ObamaBush: Obama ups spending on nuclear weapons stockpile. Anyone who uses the term ObamaBush gets another wingnut point.

Hmmm, a picture of you posing with Ron Paul. Another check.

Global warming is a fraud. Ditto. Wingnut City.

Woah Nellie, I thought you gave up on Alex Jones, but you have linked to an article titled NASA Global Warming Alarmist Endorses Book That Calls For Mass Genocide.

At least there are some Mormons who embrace the idea that the Church of Latter Day Saints is a cult. They mean cult in a good way. Whatever that means. You're a wingnut. Why not embrace the term?

The only thing preventing Alex Jones being sued by Hansen for libel is oh well, who knows, maybe he'll do it. Anyway, goofy conspiracy theories go into the wingnut aisle. Lefties don't fall for that shit. Lefties tend to be intellectual. Unless of course they've been co-opted by right woos left propagandists such as Alex Jones and Michael Rivero.

Wow, I bet you used to have Jeff Rense as a link. I see Coast to Coast. Wingnut. News With Views. Wingnut. The Power Hour. You do have Rense as a link. You are the biggest fucking loser wingnut of all time. This is riotous. Thank you for this, wingnut.

Wanttoknow.info. Hahahahhahahha.


As for some of those others, have you ordered your tinfoil hat yet?

socrates said...

Dude, the thing is I'm not on blogger much. Here. DFQ2. That's about it. The blogger profiles are a specific counter that means nothing! Hmm. Plug in Michael Rivero and Willis Carto into google. I'm getting my website for the top two results. Can you do that with any search words? I'm more prolific or better at gaming things than TLNL, or he'd have shown up. TLNL made a lot of his posts at a website which is now hidden to the public. You have no such excuse, wingnut.

socrates said...

Oops, top three slots.

Larry said...

"Lefties don't fall for that shit. Lefties tend to be intellectual."

Whats intellectual about just calling people "wingnuts" without ONE SHRED of evidence??? You just name-call, and name-call and name-call and dont ever say WHYYYYYYYYYY you call the person names. Try PROVING what you say. Im a "wingnut" for posing with Ron Paul, WHYYYYYYYYY????

Im a "wingnut" for believing global warming is a hoax----WHYYYYYYYYYYYY????

You NEVER EVER say WHYYYYYYYYYY.

"Wow, I bet you used to have Jeff Rense as a link. I see Coast to Coast. Wingnut. News With Views. Wingnut. The Power Hour. You do have Rense as a link. You are the biggest fucking loser wingnut of all time. This is riotous. Thank you for this, wingnut."

Yeah, a "wingnut" you REFUSE and CANNOT debunk!!! You havent done it ONCE yet! Do you even realize that when you call me a "wingnut" that makes you WORSE than a wingnut for the mere fact that you have not yet ONCE debunked me???? Either has TLNL!!

I NEVER said I gave up on Alex Jones. I called him out on his dishonesty and left it at that. I read things carefully before I post them on my blog.

Care to give any reasons WHY Im a "wingnut"? If this was a name-calling contest, youd wins hands down! But, unfortunately for you, its a battle for FACTS------you lose! Calling people "wingnuts" is NOT winning the fact war. I call people names in my articles all the time, but I BACK IT UP in the same article by saying WHY they are what I just called them! You FAIL to do that, because its MUCH easier to say "wingnut" than it is for you to INVESTIGATE FACTS!

"Anyone who uses the term ObamaBush gets another wingnut point."

Can you name ONE thing that makes Obama and Bush different??? BESIDES their skin color and age???

Larry said...

130 since August of 2007??? Thats even less hits than TLNL! LOL. He gets 0.7 hits a day---you get 0.2!!!! 0.2 hits a day!!!!!!!

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!!

socrates said...

Hey DumbDumb, hits on a blogspot profile mean squadouche. Most of my blogger posts are made on my DFQ2 blogspot. Thus, there is really no need for anyone to look at my profile. They are already on the blogger page I am posting on. Hits on a profile page have zero relationship with how many hits any one blogspot receives. To think otherwise implies stupidity.

Of course you're not going to admit you're a wingnut. But your links suggest you are one. I guess 90% of people would consider you one. You link to Rense.com. That alone proves you are a wingnut.

Linking prominently to Rense.com is not an indication of wingnuttery? Dissing Bill O'Reilly proves nothing. You only do that, because he doesn't subscribe to your paranoid world view of "run for the hills, it's the Jooos!!!!" You link to RENSE.COM, you numbnut.

I'm done with you. You're a waste of time.

Larry said...

And the fact that you CONTINUE to IGNORE me asking you OVER and OVER and OVER WHYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY Im a "wingnut" for the things I believe or post, means that you cannot even DEBUNK your OWN claims, let alone debunk MINE!

So, good job posting the same old "youre a wingnut" post in reply EVERY SINGLE TIME I ask you WHYYYYYYYY Im a "wingnut". Like I said, that makes you WORSE than a wingnut, that you are UNABLE to DEBUNK the "wingnut" and tell them WHYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY they are. Whats that make YOU?

A complete ASS? Also, you must be retarded since you fail to answer simple questions. I guess thats why you love TLNL so much-----you both possess the same train of [non] thought. LOL

Gonna tell me WHYYYYYYY next time or will you just keep REPEATING over and over that Im a "wingnut"??? Oh, please, say it again---it brings out your "intellectualism"----you DID say that "Lefties don't fall for that shit. Lefties tend to be intellectual."

Yeah, OK. A second grader can keep saying "wingnut!" all day. An intellectaul would say WHY they do AND back it up with EVIDENCE.

But you cant----and wont. It sure feels good to be on the side of truth.

Im kinda looking forward to The Last Dipshit Left to enable comment moderation again.

socrates said...

Shitfock, you link to Rense.com. Debunk that!

Larry said...

Im IGNORED AGAIN by the "intellectual"-----LOL!!!

the_last_name_left said...

L: I ask you WHYYYYYYYY Im a "wingnut".

Here you are prentending that your links to Illuminati-scaryifyingwoowoobullshit.com shouldn't automatically be dismissed as the total bullshit they so obviously are.

You are already familiar with Rense.com - you link to it.

Does it need to be explained to you why Rense is such a ridiculous source to quote?

Does it need to be explained every single fucking time?

Your sources chuck out utter shit. Loads of it. Astonishing how anyone can imagine "truth" is going to come out of there.

The only truths to come out of Rense and your sources is the proof that there are lots of gullible people, and plenty of others wicked or stupid enough to exploit them.

A merry dance.

Larry said...

"Does it need to be explained every single fucking time?

Your sources chuck out utter shit. Loads of it. Astonishing how anyone can imagine "truth" is going to come out of there."

You two proclaim what the links are tied to but you two NEVER PROVE IT!!!

PROVE IT! You havent proved it ONCE, NOT FUCKING ONCE!! You say Carto is tied to Alex Jones over and over and over and over! Youve said it 100 fucking times-----NEVER PROVED IT ONCE! NOT ONE TIME!!!

When----When, I ask, will you PROVE IT?????

Never????

Your credibility is completely shot to HELL because of the NUMEROUS times I have debunked you and asked you questions that you AVOID. You ADDRESS questions by including a guys name or a key phrase in your responses, but you never ANSWER THE QUESTION.

To this day, you have NOT YET answered what the link was between you saying Bellone is a scam artist and him saying he saw black boxes. You said "Its called money"---thats not ANSWERING the question. OBVIOUSLY, if he is a scam artist hes in it for MONEY---duhhhhh.

MY question was: Where is the connection between him making MONEY and him saying he saw black boxes??? Why couldnt he be a scam artist ANYWAY even WITHOUT saying he saw black boxes???

YOU FAIL TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION, WHICH WAS MY ORIGINAL QUESTION!!

the_last_name_left said...

L: MY question was: Where is the connection between him making MONEY and him saying he saw black boxes??? Why couldnt he be a scam artist ANYWAY even WITHOUT saying he saw black boxes???

No one said his being a scam artist means he couldn't be telling the truth about the black boxes.

It works like this, see, Larry: there's absolutely nothing which suggests he is telling the truth.

N_O_T_H_I_N_G

But on the other side of the scales we have the apparent fact that no blackboxes were found, *and* that the dude making the claims he *had* seen them turns out to be some sort of conman, thief, and impersonator of firemen.

You tell me why you believe him?

You believe him because he appears to be a conman?

Or do you believe him for some other reason? because there's apparently absolutely ZERO reason to believe the guy.

You need to explain why he should be believed......the reasons why not to believe him seem pretty obvious.

L: PROVE IT! You havent proved it ONCE, NOT FUCKING ONCE!! You say Carto is tied to Alex Jones over and over and over and over! Youve said it 100 fucking times-----NEVER PROVED IT ONCE! NOT ONE TIME!!!

Give me some names and groups which you would accept as being "tied" to Alex Jones.....

the_last_name_left said...

Larry - here's a list of examples of Alex Jones promoting the opinions of Willis Carto -

http://the-last-blog-left.blogspot.com/2009/08/prisonplanet-and-americanfreepress.html

Here's an Alexa listing of websites *RELATED* to Willis Carto's AFP - Jones' sites feature twice in the top 10:

http://the-last-blog-left.blogspot.com/2009/08/americanfreepress-alexas-related-links.html

Here's something on one of Alex's perennial guests......The Reverend Pike.....and his associations with Willis Carto (and David Duke):

http://the-last-blog-left.blogspot.com/2009/08/reverend-pike-and-prisonplanet.html

Here's something on another favoured guest of Alex Jones - Eustace Mullins. Note Mullins' long-time association with the far-right, nazism, Willis Carto and.....now Alex Jones. Jones calls Eustace Mullins "a modern-day founding father" (!)

http://the-last-blog-left.blogspot.com/2009/08/eustace-mullins-anti-semite.html

We also have the fact that Alex Jones makes frequent use of Big Jim Tucker. Big Jim Tucker has been a colleague of Willis Carto for 20 years - first at Carto's Spotlight, then at AFP. All of Jones' Bildeberg rubbish comes from Tucker. Same stuff as appears in AFP.

And the content of Jones' site is just like AFP. The same agenda prevails. Obviously.

Just like the same agenda is operating at Rivero's WhatReallyHappened. Alex Jones has Rivero as a regular guest (or at least used to). They share Alex's broadcaster for their respective radio shows. The advertisers are shared. The stories they publish and promote are all much the same.

Rivero has people like David Duke and Curt Maynard on his radio show - even as he works alongside Alex - and whilst Alex claims to be "fighting fascism"! Ridiculous. For all that Alex Jones brags about he is "fighting fascism" he could more easily start with recognising his own friends and colleagues ongoing relationships with genuine nazis first, don't you think? Maybe he'd like to mention his supposed disgust of nazism to his friends - rather than trying his best to avoid mentioning it?

Mightn't that be what his audience might be entitled to EXPECT him to do?

Incidentally - here's David Duke appearing on Rense. We all know Rense is junk - and that it AGAIN shares much the same agenda. Why would Duke be on there, otherwise? Why would Larry link to Rense otherwise? Why would Larry link to PRisonplanet otherwise? Because there's no "link" between any of it......sure.....lol

David Duke on Jeff Rense Radio Program 1/26/2010

http://www.davidduke.com/general/david-duke-on-jeff-rense-radio-program-1262010_16033.html


Do you need it explaining why Duke is no "mr nice guy"? Do you need it explaining why only a moron would provide Duke an uncritical platform to publicise his views?

the_last_name_left said...

And sort yourself out, Larry. Stop being such a jerk? Disagree all you like.......that's fine. But don't be a twat about it?

You're welcome to disagree......but chill out? Calm down? Talk sense?

Larry said...

"No one said his being a scam artist means he couldn't be telling the truth about the black boxes."

LIE!!!!!!!! YOU DID! ON January 26when you said THIS:

"Bellone has a string of charges against him - relating to his honesty -- and his being a scam artist whom uses 911 to exploit people.

You don't think that's relevant to his claims about having found the black boxes?

Fine.

You go on believing this one bloke.....and continue basing an entire massive conspiracy and a political conception around it........good luck.

Believe whatever you like, Larry."

MORE DISINFO AND LIES FROM THE SULTAN OF SPIN AND THE LORD OF LIES...TLNL!! Once AGAIN, I DESTROY YOU with your OWN words!!!! Hahahahahahahahahahahah.

If you NEVER lie, you dont need a good memory---meaning, you dont have to always remember things you say if you never lie. Apparently, catching you making contradictory statements and flat out LYING is becoming one big task for me!! LOL

The FACT that you have made MULTIPLE contradictory statements and have LIED to cover it up makes you the VERY THING you claim Alex Jones is---a messenger of disinfo--and your words cannot be trusted.

Just in the past 10 days I have caught you red-handed making contradictory statements.

1- saying the McCormick Center was LIKE wtc7 then saying it was NOT like wtc7.

2- Just now about Bellone when you claimed:

"No one said his being a scam artist means he couldn't be telling the truth about the black boxes."---ahhhh but you DID as I pointed out when 8 days ago you said "You don't think that's relevant to his claims about having found the black boxes?"

Do you have multi-personality disorder? Should I just call you SYBIL? LOL

Cant wait to see how you spin, lie or completely IGNORE your way out of the contradictory Bellone comments. This should be fun!

YOU are your worst enemy!

Larry said...

Hey Cock-rates----I guess TLNL WASNT being contradictory there? Or are you still going to defend him???

the_last_name_left said...

you twit, Larry.

I never said McCormick was identical to WTC7.

I never said it was impossible Bellone could be telling the truth - just that there appears to be no reason to believe him - as apparently he's a con-man.

I notice you avoid addressing my questions - again. why do you believe Bellone, Larry?

Larry said...

Hey ASS.....these are YOUR WORDS:

"Bellone has a string of charges against him - relating to his honesty -- and his being a scam artist whom uses 911 to exploit people.

You don't think that's relevant to his claims about having found the black boxes?

Fine.

You go on believing this one bloke.....and continue basing an entire massive conspiracy and a political conception around it........good luck.

Believe whatever you like, Larry."

YOU said that! I didnt make it up! Thats in COMPLETE contradiction to you saying this:

"No one said his being a scam artist means he couldn't be telling the truth about the black boxes."

COMPLETE OPPOSITE statements. And you DID flip flop on the McCormick Center being "like"/"not like" WTC 7:

Here are your two statements:

BEFORE: "The McCormick was not a structure like the WTC....."

AFTER: "The steel framed McCormick Center was at the time the World's largest exhibition center. It like the WTC used long steel trusses to create a large open space without columns. Those trusses were unprotected but of course much of the WTC lost it's fire protection due to the impacts."

BOTH statements are talking about the STRUCTURE of the building---NOT about the COLLAPSE of them----but the first time I posted these contradictory statements, you said THIS:

"No, the McCormick building and its collapse was not "identical" to the WTC. No-one said it was.

But McCormick is "like" WTC because it was steel building - which collapased because of fire."

You made it appear as if you were saying one comment was about the STRUCTURE and the other comment was about the COLLAPSE. LIE!!!

AS I PROVED above----BOTH comments were about the STRUCTURE.

Youre nothing but a walking pile of disinfo/lying SHIT!

Larry said...

The point that I have been making from the very beginning still stands:

Why do people who claim to possess the REAL truth blatantly and consistently LIE and flip-flop on what they say? I have been CONSISTENT since day ONE, and TLNL has this incredible need to constantly LIE and contradict himself. I have never contradicted myself---not ONCE. How is it that the "nut"/"kook" never contradicts himself but the ones who hold the TRUTH lie and contradict themselves? Hmmmmm. Interesting.

the_last_name_left said...

man, this is fucking tedious.

All your questions have been addressed Larry.

I shan't repeat the answers.

On the other hand, why do you AVOID answering questions.

Back in Aug/July I asked if you were an architect. I must have asked 100 times......and you have never answered.

HEre's what you said:

L: Larry: Funny how people are NOT experts or architects when they cant answer hard questions, but when they are trying to PROVE their points they become instant experts.

Are you an architect Larry?

Why have you been so scared to answer for 6 months? LOL

Awwww - little baby doesn't like to confess he's no expert. Awww.

I have asked you for the reasons why you believe an apparent con-man's word.

S I L E N C E

I have asked you to explain how the buildings were brought down by explosives.

S I L E N C E

Here's what you say when you believe your questions haven't been answered:

L: You REFUSE to answer my questions, which means one thing and one thing ONLY........you CANT answer them.
It's amusing how much you do to avoid answering the question.

On top of this , you have made exaggerations and mistakes of fact right through your presntations, Larry.

example - you said Atta's passport was found outside WTC by the FBI. Wrong.

You said the hijackers had worked at US Airbases. Wrong.

You said Poplawski held opposing views to Alex Jones. WRONG.

We could go on and on with your mistaken claims. But don't worry about it - you carry on believing conmen.

Go and read the Chip Berlet report I posted......and examine your own beliefs. Dumb conspiracist.

socrates said...

Larry's a latent homosexual. He needs counseling. Great job, TLNL, showing what Alex Jones is connected to. And thanks for seeing my point about Larry's links, and how that proves he's a wingnut. Man, he's totally come unhinged. I pity him. That's some ugly mental illness he's sharing with the world.

the_last_name_left said...

Thanks. ;)

I think Larry's intensity is a symptom of what conspiracy theory does to people......either that, or conspiracy theory tends to appeal to people with intensity such as Larry displays.

I've seen it over and over.

Part of it is surely due CT implicitly suggesting anyone whom doesn't share the CTs views are likely part of the monolithic conspiracy itself - and hence are satanic, evil, genocidal, manipulative, dishonest, etc.

There simply isn't any tolerance - or even understanding - that people can hold different views and remain well-intentioned ie without having to be part of the grand conspiracy itself.

I also think CT is essentially anti-rational. I woke up to this myself when I spent so much time within their ranks.....I could feel myself becoming unhinged....

I would say the only reason I could recognise it was because I'd had such a grounding in leftwing politics and history previously. If I hadn't had that as a bulwark against CT, I suspect I wouldn't have escaped adopting such an all encompassing worldview.

I don't think it is coincidence that the apparently primary motivating myth of Nazism was essentially a conspiracy theory - that there was a Jewish World Conspiracy.

I'm not smart enough to articulate the connections.....but I don't doubt they're there. It's all been roughly articulated in "The paranoid style in American Politics" etc anyway?

Hey - that Chip Berlet report I posted is dedicated to that guy who died in Germany after being chased out by LaROuchies (because he'd complained about the anti-semitism)

The report references LaRouche several times......I learnt Webster Griffin Tarpley is a former LaRouche "analyst".

It's a good read......and explains my own concerns much better than I am capable of.

I feel quite vindicated by reading it - the things I noticed and complained about in 911 Troof, and the Patriot movement more generally, are real -- and the objections to them are clearly beginning to gain traction.

I agree with Berlet that it's too easy to simply denounce these kooks as rightwing fringe.....and ignore them. I think they are potentially very dangerous.

One need only look through any political website's user comments to find echoes of Troofers language and ideas......it shows how pernicious they are, and how susceptible people are to it. Even amongst the left.

And it runs across the whole gamut - from 911 to Israel/Palestine, from global warming to healthcare, from public spending to bailouts etc etc.

In the last 12 months alone we've had books on it by Neiwert and BErlet, a biography of Willis Carto.....Democracy Now just did a special on the far-right etc.

I think perhaps it's more clear now that Obama has been elected - there's more obvious division between left/right: the right's total and maniacal opposition to Obama helps liberals and lefties realise they've been sleeping with some strange bedfellows these last years.

Larry said...

I'll keep re-posting this until you address it. You made CLEAR-CUT contradictory statements and all you did was AVOID owning up to them!

Hey ASS.....these are YOUR WORDS:

"Bellone has a string of charges against him - relating to his honesty -- and his being a scam artist whom uses 911 to exploit people.

You don't think that's relevant to his claims about having found the black boxes?

Fine.

You go on believing this one bloke.....and continue basing an entire massive conspiracy and a political conception around it........good luck.

Believe whatever you like, Larry."

YOU said that! I didnt make it up! Thats in COMPLETE contradiction to you saying this:

"No one said his being a scam artist means he couldn't be telling the truth about the black boxes."

COMPLETE OPPOSITE statements. And you DID flip flop on the McCormick Center being "like"/"not like" WTC 7:

Here are your two statements:

BEFORE: "The McCormick was not a structure like the WTC....."

AFTER: "The steel framed McCormick Center was at the time the World's largest exhibition center. It like the WTC used long steel trusses to create a large open space without columns. Those trusses were unprotected but of course much of the WTC lost it's fire protection due to the impacts."

BOTH statements are talking about the STRUCTURE of the building---NOT about the COLLAPSE of them----but the first time I posted these contradictory statements, you said THIS:

"No, the McCormick building and its collapse was not "identical" to the WTC. No-one said it was.

But McCormick is "like" WTC because it was steel building - which collapased because of fire."

You made it appear as if you were saying one comment was about the STRUCTURE and the other comment was about the COLLAPSE. LIE!!!

AS I PROVED above----BOTH comments were about the STRUCTURE.

Youre nothing but a walking pile of disinfo/lying SHIT!

Larry said...

By the way assface. The passport found on the street by the FBI is the OFFICIAL STORY----which YOU believe in!

I said several of the hijackers trained at and listed their addresses on drivers licenses and car registrations as the Naval Air Station in Pensacola, FL. Even gave you the links to the stories where it was reported--lik this one from Newsweek!

http://www.newsweek.com/id/75797

Theres the Newsweek article about what you claimed I was WRONG about! LOL----who's the ASS now?

Poplawski DID hold opposing views as Jones. Several sites recanted their original stories claiming there WAS a connection. Heres one of the recants:

http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Pittsburgh_shooter_was_fan_of_rightwing_0405.html

Down below of this article it reads: "(Editor's note: RAW STORY regrets an early version of this article was published without an editor's approval. This article has been revised and edited)

The original article had said Alex Jones inspired Poplawski and mentioned Prison Planet---so, YOURE wrong, King of all Disinfo!

the_last_name_left said...

What I said about Poplawski is here:

http://the-last-blog-left.blogspot.com/2009/08/poplawski-and-prisonplanet.html

I did not say Alex Jones "inspired" Poplawski.

I wouldn't be so crude.....and I wouldn't use the term "inspired" as it has far too many positive connotations.

What I said was that you - published at Prisonplanet - had wrongly claimed Poplawski held "opposing views" to those of Alex Jones.

He did not. (see link above) At the very least - you have no evidence to claim he did.

-------

On McCormick.....being "like" WTC7.

A can be "like" B without being identical. They have things in common....but are not identical. (I can't believe that needs explaining)

the_last_name_left said...

On Poplawski.......

Prisonplanet wrote: [Poplawski's] views are a complete 180 from what we write about every day......
http://www.thealexjonesshow.com/articles/2009/april/040609-poplawski-smear-debunked.html

A worldwide conspiracy? A controlled media? A degenerate society? gun rights. immigration. sedition.

Sure - a complete 180 from what Prisonplanet writes about every day........

I've yet to find a single thing about which Poplawski disagreed with Jones. Does anyone know of any?

On the other hand, what we do have is Poplawski saying he "wasn't 100%" about Alex Jones....vis a vis jews.

Poplawski the nazi being "Not 100%" sure about Alex's view on Jews does not he opposed Alex Jones' views. At Stormfront, Poplawski was clearly not 100% that ALex was saying the same thing ie JOOOOS. "Not 100%" sounds like "not totally convinced" - as in, "I'm pretty sure, but I don't feel absolutely certain."

That's one helluva long way from total opposition! WHich is what you claimed, Larry, on behalf of Prisonplanet.

And how did your publisher, Prisonplanet characterise Poplawski?

There’s no doubt that Poplawski was a neo-nazi and a white supremacist who held distasteful opinions.

Oh.

Just look at Prisonplanet's response?

Nazism and racism are just "distasteful". That's it!?

If Nazism and racism are merely "distasteful".......why does Jones sell the idea he's jumping up and down with fury about "creeping fascism".....?

Come on.....wake up? Even when desperately trying to deflect criticism for being a possible influence on far-right nutters, the ABSOLUTE BEST Alex Jones and co could say was that Nazism and white supremacism are "distasteful".

They don't even go that far usually - at least not when they're interviewing Eustace "the friend of Nazis" Mullins, for example, or the Reverend Pike, or Big Jim Tucker etc.

But on the other hand they certainly do fire the word fascism around incessantly when talking about socialists, liberals, democrats, greens......or scientists, or firefighters, or news reporters, or medics.....whatever.

Wake up?

the_last_name_left said...

Read the quote from Stromfront at the top of this page?

For my part, in many cases with films such as The Money Makers and other documentaries, I don't really miss the direct pointing out of the culprits; after all, it's so obvious [Jews]

Alex Jones doesn't have to say "jews". His audience understands.

There's not much more to say about it, other than to illustrate how it happens.

And try to counter it. I guess.

Larry said...

"A can be "like" B without being identical. They have things in common....but are not identical. (I can't believe that needs explaining)"

Hey ASSFACE------I ALREADY addressed your usage of the word "IDENTICAL"----I NEVER, EVER, EVER said you used the word "IDENTICAL"---now get off that! YOU brought the word "IDENTICAL" into it just to DIVERT from my entire point! Thats not disinfo???? Since youre the king of copy and paste------copy and paste where I EVER used the word "IDENTICAL" to describe what you have said!

Whats your point about Poplawski holding similar views to Jones? Just like my story I posted about James Hansen, the global warming advocate that endorses genocide. YOU believe in global warming TOO---that must mean YOU endorse genocide TOO!

Ahhhhh, but you dont like the shoe being on the other foot DO you? When I say that people hold similar views that YOU hold that also hold another dangerous and warped view on something----you cry and bitch "Ahhh, that means nothing!"------but when people you despise hold the same views on certain things and one of them goes out and shoots people-----then the person you despise must advocate the murders--right?

Not only are you a disinformational FRAUD---but are the biggest fucking HYPOCRITE on Earth!

I will post your CONTRADICTORY statements AGAIN until you ADDRESS them:

Hey ASS.....these are YOUR WORDS:

"Bellone has a string of charges against him - relating to his honesty -- and his being a scam artist whom uses 911 to exploit people.

You don't think that's relevant to his claims about having found the black boxes?

Fine.

You go on believing this one bloke.....and continue basing an entire massive conspiracy and a political conception around it........good luck.

Believe whatever you like, Larry."

YOU said that! I didnt make it up! Thats in COMPLETE contradiction to you saying this:

"No one said his being a scam artist means he couldn't be telling the truth about the black boxes."

COMPLETE OPPOSITE statements. And you DID flip flop on the McCormick Center being "like"/"not like" WTC 7:

Here are your two statements:

BEFORE: "The McCormick was not a structure like the WTC....."

AFTER: "The steel framed McCormick Center was at the time the World's largest exhibition center. It like the WTC used long steel trusses to create a large open space without columns. Those trusses were unprotected but of course much of the WTC lost it's fire protection due to the impacts."

BOTH statements are talking about the STRUCTURE of the building---NOT about the COLLAPSE of them----but the first time I posted these contradictory statements, you said THIS:

"No, the McCormick building and its collapse was not "identical" to the WTC. No-one said it was.

But McCormick is "like" WTC because it was steel building - which collapased because of fire."

You made it appear as if you were saying one comment was about the STRUCTURE and the other comment was about the COLLAPSE. LIE!!!

AS I PROVED above----BOTH comments were about the STRUCTURE.

Youre nothing but a walking pile of disinfo/lying SHIT!

Now, ADDRESS THEM, Fuckstick!

the_last_name_left said...

COMPLETE OPPOSITE statements.

no, they're not. it's obvious.

I did also ask why you believed Bellone.

You haven't answered yet.

S_I_L_E_N_C_E

[Are you an architect?]

S_I_L_E_N_C_E

Months ago I quoted:

"The steel framed McCormick Center was at the time the World's largest exhibition center. It like the WTC used long steel trusses to create a large open space without columns. Those trusses were unprotected but of course much of the WTC lost it's fire protection due to the impacts."

That's how the McCormick was "like" WTC7.

I never said it was identical. The quote continued:

The McCormick Place fire "is significant because it illustrates the fact that steel-frame buildings can collapse as a result of exposure to fire. This is true for all types of construction materials, not only steel." wrote Robert Berhinig, associate manager of UL's Fire Protection Division and a registered professional engineer. He also discusses UL's steel fire certification much more knowledgably than Kevin Ryan. He is an example of one more highly qualified engineer who supports the collapse theory.


But that wasn't even in real doubt.....except to those, like yourself, who claim fires in places like McCormick can't weaken steel. It's impossible - so you say.

Did someone plant explosives at the McCormick? I wonder why you don't assert that.....why don't you? What more evidence do you have over WTC than McCormick as being "inside job" done on purpose and with explosives?

No steel-framed exhibition centre just like the McCormick has ever collapsed like that before.......right? Suspicious, don't you think?

socrates said...

Precisely, Larry is a clear cut example of mental illness brought on by an uncritical acceptance of the conspiracy theory garbage spammed all over the net.

I have a new entry at Davefromqueens2.blogspot I think you'd like. Check out my entry on Theresa Duncan. It's the second one I made on her the last few weeks, so you might want to also skim through the previous one. She was focked over by Rigorous Intuition. If Larry isn't careful, he's going to end up like her or in an insane asylum.

Yes, we become part of their conspiracy theory, because we don't join the Patriot Movement against the New World Order. Things have really come togethere for me the last couple months. I can see clearly how dangerous this situation has become. It is like a cult. Lyndon Larouche is a very good example. There are also cult-like features surrounding Rivero, Jones, and many more who small-minded like Larry are pawns for.

I can't even read his posts anymore. He's toxic. You asked him nicely to chill out, yet he continues to rant like a madman.

I disagree with you in putting down all conspiracy theories. I mean, there was the conspiracy to go to war in Iraq. There really was an MKUltra. Even Sunstein admits that. Operation Northwoods was for real. But I get your fundamental point.

Yes also with the problem being a lack of education. These chumps don't have the skills to balance what is theory from fact. They are truly to be pitied. Their hearts are definitely in the right place. They are just being brainwashed into thinking they can become part of the 101st keyboard commando regiment and the global conspiracy will be stopped.

I don't even hate Larry. But like trolls who have been showing up on my blog, because I have correctly stated the truth behind the Duncan suicide, along with outing the satanic panic and other rubbish spread by Jeff Wells, they are trolling me. I am against censorship, but I am not going to let them create an untenuous noise to signal ratio. I'm looking for normal people to feel comfortable contributing. I don't have patience for people like Larry, not any more.
(continued)

socrates said...

I like Chip Berlet. By the way, he's considered a CIA asset by the conspiracy theory nuts.

Yes, with the Tarpley connection to Larouche. That's one of the first things that stood out to me when getting into the Duggan story and trying to figure out Larouche. Wouldn't it be something if it turns out Jones has ties to Larouche. It wouldn't surprise me. Tarpley works for that Jones-Rivero radio network. I don't believe that's a coincidence. Damn, we must find the paystubs. p:>

Last-dude-left, we have been ahead of the curve for years, and we've always had the fundamental awareness in common. That has allowed us to get beyond any disagreements. Yes, our ideas have finally found some traction. We done good. Not trying to prop us up as more important than we are, but I truly believe we have made a difference.

Of course the kooks are dangerous. Probably not most of them. But a few. They feel so insignifcant. They are being juiced up with anger. Like that guy who went nuts at the Jewish Holocaust Museum or Smothsonian. You covered that one.

I am open about learning 9/11 conspiracy theory. But the way it's set up, with guys like Larry, it's all noise. Find a rational nice lefty to debate you fair and square, I'll listen to both of you and come to my own conclusions. But these Gunderson-Jones douches, no way. I have given up on Larry. Just seeing all those crazy links he has at his website- Rense, illuminati whatever. The guy needs some counseling bad. And I'm not just pulling the latent homosexual thing out of my ass (no pun intended). He's showing all the signs.

I get what you mean by the word troofer. You're referring to a specific type of 9/11 conspiracy theorist. And unfortunately, I admit they are dominating the topic on the net. You helped me see how Jones is an anti-semite too. Thanks for that. He's in bed with Rivero. I knew that. But now I see what you mean by how global conspiract theory is code for run for the hills, it's the Joooooos.

Larry said...

"I never said it was identical."

Are you fucking RETARDED???? I NEVER SAID YOU ORIGINALLY USED THE WORD "IDENTICAL"!!!! CAN YOU FUCKING READ????

YOU INSERTED THAT WORD SO YOU COULD CLAIM THERE WAS A DISTINCTION BETWEEN WHAT YOU HAD SAID EARLIER AND WHAT YOU SAID RECENTLY. THE ONLY DISTINCTION WAS THAT YOU SAID THAT THE MC WAS "LIKE WTC7", THEN SAID IT WAS "NOT LIKE WTC 7".

TWO CONTRADICTORY STATEMENTS. NOW YOU ARE INSERTING WORDS THAT YOU CLAIM I SAID YOU SAID SO YOU CAN DIVERT THE ISSUE! THAT IS FRAUDULENT BEHAVIOR, AND YOU FUCKING KNOW IT, YOU WORTHLESS PIECE OF MONKEY SPUNK.

I will REPEAT your CONTRADICTORY STATEMENTS OVER AND OVER until you ADDRESS THEM, you FAGGOT.

Cock-rates----if you cant or REFUSE to see where The Last Cock Left has continually IGNORED my questions, diverted away from issues and has made contradictory statements repeatedly then DENIED he did, then YOURE the mother fucker with the mental illness pal. All you mother fuckers do is say "kook" and "nut" OVER and OVER and you dont prove or refute ONE THING. Not ONE. Saying Im a "kook" and Jones is a nut over and over does NOT make it true. You actually have to PROVE IT.

Do you know what fucking PROOF means?? Obviously NOT.

TLNL CLEARLY, CLEARLY BLATANTLY LIES on these threds and your refusal to see it or acknowledge it just solidifies my stances I take and re-affirms I am on the side of truth. Here are two statements TLNL made at two SEPERATE times and he is claiming they are not contradictory:

BEFORE: "The McCormick was not a structure like the WTC....."

AFTER: "The steel framed McCormick Center was at the time the World's largest exhibition center. It like the WTC used long steel trusses to create a large open space without columns. Those trusses were unprotected but of course much of the WTC lost it's fire protection due to the impacts."

COMPLETE OPPOSITE STATEMENTS----he DENIES they are, and YOU BELIEVE HIM!

ANOTHER CONTRADICTORY STATEMENT by TLNL:

BEFORE: "Bellone has a string of charges against him - relating to his honesty -- and his being a scam artist whom uses 911 to exploit people.

You don't think that's relevant to his claims about having found the black boxes?"

AFTER: "No one said his being a scam artist means he couldn't be telling the truth about the black boxes."

COMPLETE OPPOSITE STATEMENTS----he DENIES they are, and YOU BELIEVE HIM! Fucktard!

Now, TLNL----ADDRESS your contradictions!!!

Larry said...

"Like that guy who went nuts at the Jewish Holocaust Museum or Smothsonian. You covered that one."

Oh, you mean that "LEFT" wing guy who "LEFT" wingers claimed was a "RIGHT" winger? The left-right paradigm is FALSE anyway, but Von Brunn believed in what people like YOU dumb fucks call "LEFT" wing ideology. He hated McCain, BOTH Bush presidents and FOX News----they are all "right" wing things, and he hated them-----that makes him what YOU idiots would call a LEFT wing guy.

If you classify Von Brunn as a "right" wing guy, like all the "left" wing blogs did, then you are official ambassadors of disinfo---which I already know you are---but that would seal it!

The left-right shit is false---thats why I used quotation marks.


"I disagree with you in putting down all conspiracy theories. I mean, there was the conspiracy to go to war in Iraq. There really was an MKUltra. Even Sunstein admits that. Operation Northwoods was for real. But I get your fundamental point."

Ahhhhh, so in other words, there ARE conspiracies, but ONLY THE ONES YOU ACCEPT are real; if you DONT accept them, they are NOT real. And you say I'M mentally ill?????

WOW!! LOL

Funny how you believe that Northwoods is real [as I do too], but you COMPLETELY REJECT that 9-11 could have been pulled off IN EXACTLY THE SAME FASHION as Northwoods was planned to be carried out---with remote control planes and painting planes to look like something they were not! Thats AMAZING to me!

So, you ADMIT Northwoods was REAL [which it was---although never carried out, but planned], but you REJECT that 39 years later, with FAR better technology that NOBODY could have PAINTED American Airlines logos on smaller, drone-like REMOTE CONTROL planes----JUST LIKE it mentions in Northwoods??

Operation Northwoods---although never implemented would have been a FALSE FLAG terror attack [INSIDE JOB] done by our OWN country and killed our OWN people---but you REJECT ALL POSSIBILITY that could have happened on 9-11 when there is EVIDENCE out the ASS there IS a cover up????

There was virtually NO wreckage at the Pentagon and the small hole that the "plane" made in the Pentagon clearly indicates it was NOT a massive 757 airplane. There was NO wing damage on the outside of the Pentagon. The official story says the wings "fell off" on impact, but there was NO WINGS laying on the outside of the building in ANY of the pictures----PRE-collapse or AFTER collapse of the roof. The physical evidence COMPLETELY supports the fact that what hit the Pentagon was possibly a drone that may have been PAINTED with the American Airlines logo [which explains why witnesses say they saw the logo---I dont see HOW at that speed]---and you believe that Northwoods was real but reject that the Pentagon was done in the SAME Northwoods fashion???

You have brain damage!

Larry said...

I have a question for you Socrates. Answer this ONE quesion:

IF Operation Northwoods WAS carried out---tell me, what would have convinced you it was an inside job? You accept it NOW, because the document has been declassified--that makes it easy to say "yes I believe". But in 1962, what would have convinced you it was a false flag attack? I CANT WAIT for your answer. [IF you answer it]

Larry said...

IF Northwoods was carried out, do you believe our government would have COVERED IT UP? Do you also believe that the media and politicians would be calling those who questioned Northwoods "crazy conspiracy theorists" and "kooks"?
Do you believe they would have called those who questioned Northwoods "traitors" and "un-American"?

Or do you believe they would have shouted, "We admit it! We confess! We sank our own ships and painted our own planes to look like Cuban planes and crashed them into our own landmarks! PLEASE send us to prison---PLEASE execute us for treason!"

Apparently, you believe they would have said the latter since because they dont confess to 9-11, that must mean 9-11 WASNT an inside job!

the_last_name_left said...

long rambly post coming up - feel free to ignore it........

@S: I did notice you'd already mentioned Tarpley as former LaRouchey when I reread these comments yesterday. Seems I forgot you'd already mentioned it when I came across it in Berlet's report and mentioned it here too. Still - funny coincidence it comes up again just days later.

I read your posts on the suicide woman....but I have no idea who the people are. They sound like more Barabara Hartwells.....(I'd have to dismiss them all as being "kooky". It's sad - all these people getting dragged into craziness, and/or being exploited for their kookiness and their fantasy. It's surely largely all fantasy? But all tactically (politically) useful to those with an anti-government ideology and a wild conspiracy bent....No wonder they become convinced of it.....when they're treated as "stars" and movement figures because of it.) As you say - pretty disgusting exploitation.

On the conspiracy thing - at least 911 - I have no problems with people looking into it, if that's what they want. I have no real motivation to hold to any particular view about it......other than a commitment to the facts and a coherent narrative....whatever that might be. The fundamental problem with 911 conspiracy is that it has turned up nothing. But all the sound and fury generated by its generally uncritical but ideological supporters has obscured that fact. With kooks and fascists crawling over the movement, it really isn't a surprise that it has turned up nothing, but doesn't even realise. Distortion, lies, manipulation, and pure invention.......the trademarks of Troof. And of nazism. What a coincidence.

As I've said before......I don't give Bushco a freepass on it - nor do I necessarily accept anything they say. For instance....there WERE warnings of the attacks, and still Bushco apparently did nothing. Seems to me this important aspect has been lost because Troofers shot too high......they wanted to prove a whole conspiracy......whereas they should have stuck to pursuing the very real issue that THERE WERE WARNINGS and BUSHCO DID NOTHING. Rather than trying to prove LIHOP or MIHOP, Bushco should have been pursued on what was known.......dereliction of duty, complacency over security, negligence. And all as a blowback from US intervention in geopolitics (Afghan, russian "vietnam") and its support for authoritarian regimes throughout middle east, uncritical support of Israel, etc etc. I can only see 911 Troof as having helped divert effort from that far more secure criticism. We seem further away from that point than ever now.....as 911 Troof provides an easy means to discredit legitimate questioning of it.

I don't mind questions. But one has to accept when we have a reasonable answer......and likewise we must acknowledge it when we don't have any positive evidence for alternate hypothesis.

Northwoods being a case in point. Accepting it as genuine planning document: did we know about Northwoods at the time? Did we know about it until we had an apparently official document turn up? No.

Have we had a 911 planning document show up a la Northwoods? No. Nothing of the sort. (We have a conman saying he saw the blackboxes - hardly the same)

Plus, Northwoods was apparently rejected. It was just an idea.....(if it's even a genuine document)

the_last_name_left said...

And yes, Enron was a conspiracy to defraud the Californian taxpayer/gasmarket. The evidence is in numerous courtcases, legal documents, criminal charges, whatever.

Conspiracy theorists fail to distinguish this from explaining the entirety of world events as conspiracy. Car crashes happen -- but no-one says they are part of efforts to control the world. Conspiracies happen - but that's quite different to saying they're the primary factor in explaining world historic events.

And there surely is an implicit ideological content to much of conspiracy theory. I have always been surprised at how reluctant to embrace Marxism CTs are.....whilst it isn't a conspiracy theory, it might be expected to appeal, as it provides an explanation for "everything".....and has class war at its centre - analogous to the conspirators vs "the people".

But it doesn't appeal...at all.......why? Because the content of Marxism is in opposition to that of the views of CTs. ie Conspiracy Theory is just a vehicle on which the CTer can hang their pre-existing ideological views.

They even take steps to obscure this by claiming "there's no left/right"......just as Larry and Alex Jones do. Even when their views are easily distinguishable as "rightwing" and their hostility is reserved for essentially left-wing causes, beliefs and attitudes. Check out their hostility to the Frankfurt School, for example. Or to socialism generally. To civil rights. To internationalism. etc.

I think it's quite an incredible claim they make - that there's no left/right - and that CTs (such as Larry and Alex Jones) are non-ideological. What a dumb notion imo. There's "no left/right" and yet people disagree on even their worldview......and some people starve whilst others get fat....and some support property and oppose taxes, whilst others oppose property and support egalitarianism and thus redistribution etc. All because there's no left/right......yeah.....sure. We're all the same......there's no left/right. It's the end of history......(apart from those damn conspirators, huh?)

That's one of the main things I resent about CT - it seems to accept all would be well in the world, if we could only eliminate this particular sector of society - the conspirators.

Once these "evil" folk were done away with, all would be well in the world......arguments would cease.....war would end.....everything would be fine.

Kill the kulaks! Ridiculous.

That's how ridiculous Conspiracy Theory is - get rid of the conspirators, and all will be well.

And why the conspirators? Because they're "evil". Apparently. That's it. Evil.

So - simply remove the evil, and society can run along smoothly - on the exact same basis (minus the "evil", of course)

There's no wonder such views are susceptible to anti-semitism - or racism - or a Stlainist dekulakisation.

As a counter point are structural views, of which I guess Marxism is an example - the question then isn't so much about the personal and group characteristics of some small class, it isn;t about the "evil" personal characteristics this group might possess - rather it's about the entire structure that generates such classes....

The russian Czar wasn't "evil"....he was just the tip of a class structure. What was he expected to do?

Of course the Czar entered "conspiracies" against his own people. But so what? That isn't the real story - and it doesn't explain WHY he did so. It can't. It's description - not explanation. As explanation - it's vacuous, and imo, dangerous.

Overthrow the Czar conspirator!!! Now what? What changed? Evil has gone? Woohooo! Silly.

the_last_name_left said...

@Larry: you really think you're getting anywhere?

I used the word "identical" - I introduced it - not you. I am allowed to introduce words. I introduced "identical" to clarify my meaning.

McCormick is "like" WTC 7 (steel construction) --- it is also "not like" WTC7 - because it is not IDENTICAL (McCormick wasn't a skyscraper as were WTC).

See this: McCormick is more "like" WTC7 than McCormick is "like" an orange. That doesn't mean McCormick is identical to WTC - there are still things that are not alike ie McCormick is not identical to WTC7.

The main difference is that all the collapsed WTC were skyscrapers compared to McCormick - a relatively lo-rise building.

In this context the buildings are quite UNALIKE, even though they were both built of steel and both suffered catastrophic failures.

But that's an important non-likeness.

McCormick collapsed even though it was UNALIKE to WTC insofar as it was relatively lo-rise, and therefore under much less gravitational stress. If the McCormick can collapse (when it, like the WTC was built from steel), then it's obviously relevant when considering the WTC - a building built, LIKE the WTC from steel. However there's an important difference - the WTC were UNALIKE to the McCormick insofar as the WTC were all skyscrapers - and therefore under much more stress.

Does it get more difficult to build the higher you go, or not? Yes it does. Do the forces and costs and difficulties increase as you go higher? Yes they do.

Fuck - this is so stupid.

the_last_name_left said...

re Bellone

why do you believe him Larry?

I don't know if he is telling the truth. I suspect not.....especially as we have evidence he's something of a conman. He's stolen stuff from FDNY and wears it to schools to give talks on 911...! And to parade around at 911 dos? Where he claims he saw the blackboxes......and the FBI silenced him? Pathetic.

Sure - he could be telling the truth.......but why would should we believe it?

You tell me why we should believe it?

You can't give any reason as to why to believe Bellone, hence your silly preoccupation in claiming I am being contradictory by acknowledging both his apparent fraudulent activity AND the fact I do not ABSOLUTELY KNOW he is lying.

I don't know that he is lying. FACT - i do not know he is lying.

How do you ABSOLUTELY KNOW he isn't? You don't.

What do we know of Bellone that would make us believe him? Nothing.

What do we know of Bellone which might suggest we shouldn't believe?

We have newspaper reports that he is an apparent fraudster, a conman, thief and charlatan.

Hmmmm.

But maybe he really is telling the truth?

Hell, maybe he is?

Tell us why you believe he is telling the truth Larry?

Why do you believe him? On what grounds?

The answer is you have no grounds to believe him - only plenty of things which suggest he's bullshitting. Maybe he's ill....loopy....schizophrenic.....god knows?

But you have no reason to believe him - only reasons not to do so.

That's why you avoid the issue - jumping up and down about my supposed hypocrisy so as to avoid answering WHY you or anyone should believe Bellone.

Maybe Bellone is to be believed about the blackboxes. You just haven't given any reason why anyone should believe it.

Further, you're having obvious trouble acknowledging the simple facts that suggest one SHOULD NOT believe Bellone.

Oh truthseeker.

Larry said...

Hey Last DICKHEAD Left----I didnt read one word of your posts because I asked COCK-rates the questions. I already know you are incapable of answering questions---either that, or profoundly retarded. I asked your homosexual friend the questions. That means I want HIS answer, not yours. You typed those long 4 posts for absolutely nothing. I ignored them, because Im waiting for Cock-rates to answer the questions I asked HIM, not YOU. I will re-post them, so he cant claim they are way back in the thread to have noticed them. When your fag friend takes a break from fucking you in the ass, tell him to answer my questions:

For COCK-rates:

IF Northwoods was carried out, do you believe our government would have COVERED IT UP? Do you also believe that the media and politicians would be calling those who questioned Northwoods "crazy conspiracy theorists" and "kooks"?
Do you believe they would have called those who questioned Northwoods "traitors" and "un-American"?

Or do you believe they would have shouted, "We admit it! We confess! We sank our own ships and painted our own planes to look like Cuban planes and crashed them into our own landmarks! PLEASE send us to prison---PLEASE execute us for treason!"

Apparently, you believe they would have said the latter since because they dont confess to 9-11, that must mean 9-11 WASNT an inside job!

IF Operation Northwoods WAS carried out---tell me, what would have convinced you it was an inside job? You accept it NOW, because the document has been declassified--that makes it easy to say "yes I believe". But in 1962, what would have convinced you it was a false flag attack? I CANT WAIT for your answer. [IF you answer it]

So, you ADMIT Northwoods was REAL [which it was---although never carried out, but planned], but you REJECT that 39 years later, with FAR better technology that NOBODY could have PAINTED American Airlines logos on smaller, drone-like REMOTE CONTROL planes----JUST LIKE it mentions in Northwoods??

Operation Northwoods---although never implemented would have been a FALSE FLAG terror attack [INSIDE JOB] done by our OWN country and killed our OWN people---but you REJECT ALL POSSIBILITY that could have happened on 9-11 when there is EVIDENCE out the ASS there IS a cover up????

There was virtually NO wreckage at the Pentagon and the small hole that the "plane" made in the Pentagon clearly indicates it was NOT a massive 757 airplane. There was NO wing damage on the outside of the Pentagon. The official story says the wings "fell off" on impact, but there was NO WINGS laying on the outside of the building in ANY of the pictures----PRE-collapse or AFTER collapse of the roof. The physical evidence COMPLETELY supports the fact that what hit the Pentagon was possibly a drone that may have been PAINTED with the American Airlines logo [which explains why witnesses say they saw the logo---I dont see HOW at that speed]---and you believe that Northwoods was real but reject that the Pentagon was done in the SAME Northwoods fashion???

Ahhhhh, so in other words, there ARE conspiracies, but ONLY THE ONES YOU ACCEPT are real; if you DONT accept them, they are NOT real. And you say I'M mentally ill?????

Larry said...

Conservative Gary Allen said:

"If we were merely dealing with the law of averages, half of the events affecting our nation's well-being should be good for America. If we were dealing with mere incompetence, our leaders should occasionally make a mistake in our favor...We are not really dealing with coincidence or stupidity, but with planning and brilliance."

In other words, everything that happens is a calculated agenda, not an accident, because if it was accidental stemming from either incompetence or coincidence, a good number of things would result in good for the benefit of the people---but clearly we see that just about everything benefits the politicians, the bankers, the corporations, the rich, the elitists...etc. Dont you think at least half the time it would benefit US if there's NO conspiracies?

socrates said...

Hey TLNL, it's nice to be able to have sane dialogue. That's something the latent homosexual hasn't figured out yet. When I see his invectives and bold print, I hit that scroll button fairly quickly.

The Tarpley connection showed up because of the Schiller Institute, the Larouche cult Jeremiah Duggan unfortunately got tangled up with. Tarpley helped run the American version. Then it was a matter of a few google clicks to see he has written for Larouche publications and amazingly enough can be tied to Alex Jones through that radio network.

I definitely don't want you to go down that other rabbit hole I told you about. Thanks for taking the looksie. It's just another example of how certain conspiracy theories are ruining real lives. I fear for Larry's well-being. He is way out there. I also thought you'd be interested to see how that starlet had gotten trapped specifically through Rigorous Intuition.

I think we can be fairly sure that Operation Northwoods was a real document. I doubt Sunstein would have mentioned it, if it weren't. Man, the worst part of the net is all this conspiracy chatter. One can google Operation Northwoods, but good luck finding credible sources to figure it out. A library card would be a better tool.

Larry does make one good point I'll agree with. I believe if Operation Northwoods had been put into action, we'd never have heard of it. It would have become classified forever.

The Gulf of Tonkin seems to have been a false flag operation. Just because most of the conspiracy theory chatter is rubbish doesn't mean everything can be easily brushed aside as fabrications.


And this constant astroturf that there is no real difference between left and right is preposterous. It reeks of being a disinfo meme.

Of course Von Brunn was a wingnut. I found an interesting link, you might want to check out. Apparently, he might have had plans to attack some right wingers.

That just shows how there is some variety with wingnuts. Many are pro-Israel and not into conspiracy theories, or at least the ones we have been investigating. I see this meme being thrown out similar to Rex Curry, the fool I mentioned in the first post of this thread. The guy who tries to explain Nazi Germany of having been socialist.

You know, I don't mind a good conspiracy theory, but it gets to be too much. I think the way they are portrayed on the net is similar to how cults operate. Larry appears to be a cult victim. It's very sad. Because like I said before, his heart appears to be in the right place, putting his homophobia to the side.

Larry said...

And you, Cock-rates suffer from "I-refuse-to-answer-questions-itis". The same disease The Last Cockbreath Left has. You IGNORED my questions. How convenient. I will re-post them since you, the "intellectual" are retarded and need them re-posted. Spare me the ad hominem attacks and answer my SIMPLE questions:

For COCK-rates:

1. IF Northwoods was carried out, do you believe our government would have COVERED IT UP?

2. Do you also believe that the media and politicians would be calling those who questioned Northwoods "crazy conspiracy theorists" and "kooks"?

3. Do you believe they would have called those who questioned Northwoods "traitors" and "un-American"?

4. Or do you believe they would have shouted, "We admit it! We confess! We sank our own ships and painted our own planes to look like Cuban planes and crashed them into our own landmarks! PLEASE send us to prison---PLEASE execute us for treason!"??

Apparently, you believe they would have said the latter since because they dont confess to 9-11, that must mean 9-11 WASNT an inside job!

5. IF Operation Northwoods WAS carried out---tell me, what would have convinced you it was an inside job?

You accept it NOW, because the document has been declassified--that makes it easy to say "yes I believe".

6. But in 1962, what would have convinced you it was a false flag attack? I CANT WAIT for your answer. [IF you answer it]

7. So, you ADMIT Northwoods was REAL [which it was---although never carried out, but planned], but you REJECT that 39 years later, with FAR better technology that NOBODY could have PAINTED American Airlines logos on smaller, drone-like REMOTE CONTROL planes----JUST LIKE it mentions in Northwoods??

8. Operation Northwoods---although never implemented would have been a FALSE FLAG terror attack [INSIDE JOB] done by our OWN country and killed our OWN people---but you REJECT ALL POSSIBILITY that could have happened on 9-11 when there is EVIDENCE out the ASS there IS a cover up????

There was virtually NO wreckage at the Pentagon and the small hole that the "plane" made in the Pentagon clearly indicates it was NOT a massive 757 airplane. There was NO wing damage on the outside of the Pentagon. The official story says the wings "fell off" on impact, but there was NO WINGS laying on the outside of the building in ANY of the pictures----PRE-collapse or AFTER collapse of the roof. The physical evidence COMPLETELY supports the fact that what hit the Pentagon was possibly a drone that may have been PAINTED with the American Airlines logo [which explains why witnesses say they saw the logo---I dont see HOW at that speed]---

9. ---and you believe that Northwoods was real but reject that the Pentagon was done in the SAME Northwoods fashion???

10. Ahhhhh, so in other words, there ARE conspiracies, but ONLY THE ONES YOU ACCEPT are real; if you DONT accept them, they are NOT real. And you say I'M mentally ill?????

When, oh when, will you answer them???

Larry said...

"Of course Von Brunn was a wingnut. I found an interesting link, you might want to check out. Apparently, he might have had plans to attack some right wingers."

I said that LAST YEAR on my blog Cock-rates and TLNL constantly IGNORED me saying it. I didnt find ONE "left" wing blog pointing that out---not ONE. One of his targets may have been the DC FOX News division. He also hated McCain and both Bush Presidents. I said that from the get-go----and youre just NOW saying it. I even said it on this SAME thread yesterday morning.

Good work taking 9 months to get the scoop on that Cock-rates----but your cocksucker-in-crime TLNL keeps PARROTING THAT VON BRUNN WAS "LEFT" WING-----and YOU BELIEVE EVERYTHING HE SAYS!

You cant say he was "left" wing because he has 9-11 conspiracy theories---because for 1. Most things about 9-11 are NOT conspiracies at all, and 2. It all depends on who you ask on whether you deem someone like that "left" wing.

"Right" wingers call 9-11 truthers "left" wing, and "left" wingers call us "right" wing. Case-in-point:

Bill O Reilly [considered "RIGHT" wing calls us "left" wing loons]

Dave Neiwert [considered "LEFT" wing calls us "kooks"---as well as you two douchebags---yet, you NEVER EVER debunk us---thats because youre too busy IGNORING questions and claim that the government would "never ignore hard questions"----but even insignificant people like YOU TWO IGNORE QUESTIONS!

Questions 2 and 3 in my above post goes along with what I just said.

Anyway, good job "scoop" Cock-rates on taking 9 months to report Von Brunn was a "left" winger!!

Now, answer my above questions ya retard, or are the "kooks" questions just too hard???? LOL

the_last_name_left said...

L:
When, oh when, will you answer them???


Go fuck yourself, Larry.

You haven't answered a single fucking question asked of you.

You lose the right to go around demanding answers as you refuse to answer any yourself.

Fuck off you cheating cunt.

socrates said...

The guy can't stop thinking about the male reproductive organ. According to many shrinks, that means Larry is a latent homosexual.

He also doesn't stop to realise that people who throw around filthy language and bold print are considered as trolls. The net adage is to not feed them.

I skimmed very quickly through his rant. I may have missed it, but the dude is showing how big of a moron he is. The fact that Von Brunn may have had plans to attack right wingers doesn't mean he was a left winger.

It'd be nice if he'd just go away. He's a waste of time.

It sounds like if he would just hit some gay bars and find a boyfriend, basically accept who he is, perhaps he'd lose a lot of that insane rage. Larry should definitely check himself into a mental institution as soon as possible. Proper authorities might want to keep an eye on him. He sounds kind of violent and perhaps a threat to the public interest. He could be the next Von Brunn. He does link to Rense.com. I wish I was a European, so I could get away with calling him a cunt, because that's what he is. An insane one.

Real Truth Online said...

"Go fuck yourself, Larry."

"Fuck off you cheating cunt."

My oh my---such vitriol and foul mouthed behavior!! What I got accused of many times---AND was the reason given for me not being answered dozens of times---because of my "language"----but apparently, you can shoot off foul language and its A-OK. Quite amusing...LOL.

"He also doesn't stop to realise that people who throw around filthy language and bold print are considered as trolls. The net adage is to not feed them."

Hmmmmm, and yet your gay lover just told me to 'fuck myself' and called me 'cunt'------I guess HE'S a troll then????

"The fact that Von Brunn may have had plans to attack right wingers doesn't mean he was a left winger."

Ahhhh, dont you love it! If a "right" wing person shoots a bunch of people---then the "left" wing blogs light up like a Las Vegas marquee saying that he is a terrorist and a "right wing extremist", "white supremacist", etc.... the list goes on. But when a person who is against "right" wing people or ideologies shoots people, he isnt NECESSARILY LEFT WING!

Ya gotta love it!

Real Truth Online said...

Now, dickhead, since I have had to re-post this THREE times now since your profound mental retardation is obstructing your reading capacities---I will post it AGAIN. Answer this time. I will assume if you continue refusing to respond, it will indicate quite clearly you HAVE NO ANSWER because me, the "so-called" "nut" is CRUSHING you with FACTS....as usual:

1. IF Northwoods was carried out, do you believe our government would have COVERED IT UP?

2. Do you also believe that the media and politicians would be calling those who questioned Northwoods "crazy conspiracy theorists" and "kooks"?

3. Do you believe they would have called those who questioned Northwoods "traitors" and "un-American"?

4. Or do you believe they would have shouted, "We admit it! We confess! We sank our own ships and painted our own planes to look like Cuban planes and crashed them into our own landmarks! PLEASE send us to prison---PLEASE execute us for treason!"??

Apparently, you believe they would have said the latter since because they dont confess to 9-11, that must mean 9-11 WASNT an inside job!

5. IF Operation Northwoods WAS carried out---tell me, what would have convinced you it was an inside job?

You accept it NOW, because the document has been declassified--that makes it easy to say "yes I believe".

6. But in 1962, what would have convinced you it was a false flag attack? I CANT WAIT for your answer. [IF you answer it]

7. So, you ADMIT Northwoods was REAL [which it was---although never carried out, but planned], but you REJECT that 39 years later, with FAR better technology that NOBODY could have PAINTED American Airlines logos on smaller, drone-like REMOTE CONTROL planes----JUST LIKE it mentions in Northwoods??

8. Operation Northwoods---although never implemented would have been a FALSE FLAG terror attack [INSIDE JOB] done by our OWN country and killed our OWN people---but you REJECT ALL POSSIBILITY that could have happened on 9-11 when there is EVIDENCE out the ASS there IS a cover up????

There was virtually NO wreckage at the Pentagon and the small hole that the "plane" made in the Pentagon clearly indicates it was NOT a massive 757 airplane. There was NO wing damage on the outside of the Pentagon. The official story says the wings "fell off" on impact, but there was NO WINGS laying on the outside of the building in ANY of the pictures----PRE-collapse or AFTER collapse of the roof. The physical evidence COMPLETELY supports the fact that what hit the Pentagon was possibly a drone that may have been PAINTED with the American Airlines logo [which explains why witnesses say they saw the logo---I dont see HOW at that speed]---

9. ---and you believe that Northwoods was real but reject that the Pentagon was done in the SAME Northwoods fashion???

10. Ahhhhh, so in other words, there ARE conspiracies, but ONLY THE ONES YOU ACCEPT are real; if you DONT accept them, they are NOT real. And you say I'M mentally ill?????

Real Truth Online said...

"You haven't answered a single fucking question asked of you."

What havent I answered? You ADMITTED that I answered your questions LAST YEAR. Shall I re-post YOUR OWN WORDS again?

"You haven't answered these questions since July or August 09"

So, you ADMIT that I DID answer them in July/August '09!

Yet, you STILL hve not answered SCORES of mine---including the "like WTC7"/ "is NOT like WTC7" bullshit you spewed out of your multi-personality lips.

AND you have not answered the Bellone question I asked you 5 or 6 times now. Just saying Bellone's NAME in your response is NOT answering the question-----QUEENIE.

Amazing. You ADMIT I answer your questions, then STILL claim I didnt answer them. On the other hand you REFUSE to answer MINE and yet claim you have!

Priceless!

Which one of your personalities is getting fucked in the ass by Cock-rates right now? Hahahaha.

I cant wait until you queenies respond and yet AGAIN ignore my questions----it just further solidifies my stances and further makes you two the massive FRAUDS you are.

Real Truth Online said...

By the way, congrats Sybil---youre up to 490 hits now! Keep up the good work! LOL

the_last_name_left said...

L: apparently, you can shoot off foul language and its A-OK. Quite amusing...LOL.

Oh here we go......it's time for the poor liddle abused Larry scenario now.

Awww - poor little Larry.......people call you names? (YOU THINK IT'S UNFAIR? --- AFTER YOU'VE SPENT DAYS WEEKS AND MONTHS BEING AN INSULTING FOUL-MOUTHED LITTLE TWERP?) Pathetic.

Larry - stop spamming your stupid questions. You don't have a right to demand answers......especially when you refuse to answer questions yourself.

You lose the moral right to dmand answers because you refuse to answer any.

ARE YOU AN ARCHITECT?

HOW DID ANYONE PLANT BOMBS IN WTC?

WHY DO YOU BELIEVE BELLONE THE APPARENT FRAUDSTER ABOUT THE BLACKBOXES?

See.....you don't actually address anything. Coward.

Your strutting around is just a way to avoid addressing the questions put to you.

WHY DO YOU BELIEVE BELLONE?

You have no answer.

L: What havent I answered? You ADMITTED that I answered your questions LAST YEAR. Shall I re-post YOUR OWN WORDS again?

"You haven't answered these questions since July or August 09"

So, you ADMIT that I DID answer them in July/August '09!


Don't be such a twat.

You have not answered them - not once. You have never answered them.......and now you try to resort to this silly little rhetorical trick so as to pretend that you have answered them.

Pathetic. Really pathetic.

L: I cant wait until you queenies respond and yet AGAIN ignore my questions-

You're pathetic - you just run off and endless list of ridiculous questions - and refuse to answer any. You keep going until people tire of your viciousness and bullshit and your dissembling - then you cry that you're ignored, or censored.

Pathetic.

ARE YOU AN ARCHITECT, LARRY?

WHY DO YOU BELIEVE BELLONE, LARRY? WHY SHOULD ANYONE ELSE?

HOW DID THEY PUT EXPLOSIVES IN THE WTC, LARRY?

See........you're not very good at answering questions, are you Larry. You still won't even admit you're not an architect. Wow - ain't you brave, oh truthseeker.

PAthetic.

Larry said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Larry said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
the_last_name_left said...

Are you an architect Larrrrry?

Start answering some questions, and behave civilly, and you can post.

You can't spam your silly questions.

You can't just rain down insults.

Here's some examples of your "discourse", Larry. Read the list.....see if you're impressed.

http://the-last-blog-left.blogspot.com/2009/08/larry-architect-tourettes.html

Larry said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Larry said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Larry said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
the_last_name_left said...

Change your tune Larry.......or keep getting deleted.

Larry said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Larry said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
the_last_name_left said...

Larry: Thank you Mr. Goebbels! Im truly loving this you know. You know how I LOVE making you delete and censor---and you fall right into my hands swimmingly.

Heres the post again for COCK-rates


and

It will posted until its answered. I can go as long as you can.

Let's count how many times then?

We'll take this as number 1?
----------------------------

ARE YOU AN ARCHITECT, LARRY?

WHY DO YOU BELIEVE BELLONE, LARRY?

HOW DID "THEY" PLANT EXPLOSIVES IN THE WTC?

How many times before you answer Larry? You've already been avoiding addrssing two of those 3 questions for the last 6 months. You've avoided answering those questions a hundred times already.

But we'll start at 1......and see how many times you refuse to answer.

the_last_name_left said...

L: The physical evidence COMPLETELY supports the fact that what hit the Pentagon was possibly a drone that may have been PAINTED with the American Airlines logo [which explains why witnesses say they saw the logo---I dont see HOW at that speed

LOL. Apart from people found in the wreckage still strapped into their airplane seats, you mean?

And ID cards......and other identifiable personal effects of the same people who were booked onto the plane......

Larry said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
socrates said...

Hey creep, stop trolling me, if you expect me to ever respond again to your rants. You think people would stay in your company in real life, if you were talking that way? They'd probably get you thrown in jail for disturbing the peace or worse. So stop it.

If you scroll up to one of my posts, you'll see that I answered one of your questions.

I said I agreed with you that if Op. Northwoods had been put in place and succeeded, we'd never have heard of it. Of course, I don't expect you to apologise for being a troll, or for asking me to repeat answers to your lame questions. You see Larry, you're just not that interesting a guy. Plus, I'm into women, not male reproductive organs like yourself. Not that there's anything wrong with it, except in your case for being a latent homosexual. I guess you missed that link I provided showing that the general consensus of shrink theorists would guess within a small margin of error, like your you know what, that you are a conflicted gay person.

Of course they would have covered it up.

National media wouldn't know about it, if it was covered up. It would be considered a conspiracy theory, and justly. Conspiracy theories in themselves are not always untrue.

The media and politicians wouldn't be railing against those saying it might have been a false flag. Look at MKUltra. No one's denying that didn't happen. But the Franklin Case and McMartin satanic panic never happened the way conspiracy loons say it did. If 9/11 was an inside job like you say, one might think you're a disinfo agent by acting like a madman.

Only wingnuts, not your Larouche-Alex Jones types, that Patriot Movement illuminati crap, the other versions of wingnuts would call those conspiracy theorists anti-American. You would call your counter-wingnuts Israel-firsters. It's a different form of wingnut. You're related, but there's a difference, not to be confused with altruistic, beautiful, socialist peaceniks.

Dude, you're not making much sense. You need some counseling.

Operation Northwoods didn't take place, so perhaps you need to come up with a better example. Say like MKUltra. Or research the White House Iraq Group or the spy factories. You're unhinged and sound like a lunatic.

I'm not a 9/11 debunker or believer. It's an enigma to me. I've got other things I'm into. Just because you rant and rave at me doesn't mean I have any answers for you. I don't like or respect you. I kind of am sick of your schtick. I see the invectives and bold print and scroll past you or go to other areas of the net, read TLNL's stuff or whatever, make a sandwich. It's a big world out there, and I'd like mine to be one without you in it. I don't wish you harm or anything. I simply believe you're a waste of time.

Seek some help, Larry. That's the best advice I can give you. Good night and good luck.

Larry said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
socrates said...

Not one question answered? Fuck you troll.

the_last_name_left said...

Right - that's 3 times you have refused to answer the questions, Larry.

(That's 3 times on top of the hundreds or so other times you have already avoided answering)

ARE YOU AN ARCHITECT?

You still won't answer. How pathetic is that??

So....your spam is deleted again.

the_last_name_left said...

Larry, here's Capt. Ingledue........shift safety officer of the Virginia Beach Fire Dept

"I have no reason to believe it wasn't a commercial airliner," said Capt. Ingledue. "I don't believe all those conspiracy stories and the stories people make up. I did see airplane seats and a corpse still strapped to one of the seats.


Or there's this:

When Army Staff Sgt Williams discovered the scorched bodies of several airline passengers, they were still strapped into their seats. The stench of charred flesh overwhelmed him.

"It was the worst thing you can imagine," said Williams, whose squad from Fort Belvoir, Va., entered the building, less than four hours after the terrorist attack. "I wanted to cry from the minute I walked in. But I have soldiers under me and I had to put my feelings aside."


Why should we simply disbelieve scores of credible witnesses in favour of, say, a man who steals FDNY kit so as to pretend to be a fireman, the better to run his scam charity......?

See - just asking questions.....

Why does Larry believe Bellone over the scores of other credible witnesses?

No answer to this question.

the_last_name_left said...

By Larry's own logic, Larry's avoidance of the question means simply that he can't answer the question.

Then we have Larry's refusal to answer the simple, factual question "Are you an architect?"

No-one is better placed than Larry to answer the question......yet Larry has refused to answer the question in the 6 months it has repeatedly been asked.

Larry doesn't answer this because to do so would expose him.

Larry believes ANYONE who says whatever accords with his belief about 911. Confirmation bias of an extreme sort.

The consensus view amongst architects, engineers, firemen, firstresponders, explosives experts, demolition experts, scientists, physics professors etc.......is that the buildings suffered plane crashes, (fuel) explosions, fires, and eventual collapse from structural failure.

Non-experts have little choice but in according such views a great deal of respect. How can non-experts question such expert opinion? On what grounds? One's expertise in.....say....17th Century French Pottery is hardly going to help.

So, on what grounds do the non-experts within 911 Troof trust (the professional Troofer!) Richard Gage and his friends's view of CD --- over the massive expert consensus in favour of structural collapse?

None.

THERE ARE NO GROUNDS FOR THE NON-EXPERT TO ACCEPT GAGE AND CO's OPINION OVER THE CONSENSUS EXPERT VIEW

Hence larry's refusal to answer if he is an architect.....or not.

To answer "no" would mean Larry admitting he has no relevant expertise with which to assess the various claims of Richard GAge and Co versus the claims of the expert consensus.

Admitting he wasn't an architect, Larry would be confessing he has no way to assess the claims about the WTC. It would mean confessing he made his choice out of simple prejudice.

And the troofers like to call this "science" and "the scientific method".

There are very strong similarities with global warming deniers: non-experts believe a minority of dissenting "scientists" over the claims of the (vast) expert consensus.

Based on.......what? Based on their own non-expert opinion that the (expert) view is wrong!

If everyone's an expert, what does "expert" mean?

A definition:

of or relating to or requiring special knowledge to be understood

Can everyone be an expert? Regardless.......the fact is NOT EVERYONE IS AN EXPERT (in building collapses, or climatology, or anything)

So how can competing claims be assessed by non-experts? Very poorly - if at all. Obviously.

So, is Larry an architect? No.

Does Larry have any relevant expertise with which to assess competing expert claims about structural engineering, physics of building collapse, fire damage etc? No.

Does Larry have anything other than his own bias with which to assess competing claims about collapse of WTC? No.

But look at how certain Larry (and the rest of the Troofers are) about the claims made by supposed "experts" such as Gage and co, Stephen Jones?

Larry has seemingly ABSOLUTE belief in all these claims which (he believes) will substantiate his own preconceptions.

He has no way to evaluate the various claims.......but Larry is absolutely determined that one particular minority view is right.

His non-expert opinion trumps that of the experts.......and on such a shaky basis he proceeds to build the foundation for an entire worldwide conspiracy...and an explanation for all modern History...and politics....and culture and everything else: the NWO blah blah blah.

Mental illness is lurking about, for sure.

the_last_name_left said...

Blogger socrates said...

Not one question answered? Fuck you troll.

7 February 2010 23:07


Crikey - Socrates swearing!?

:)

Larry's got a skillset they could make use of at Camp XRay............."Enough! Enough! Get this Larry creature away from me......I'll tell everything!! Waterboard me!? Anything! Just get this Larry-thing away!"

And that's just at the canteen......

the_last_name_left said...

We also have a statement from Penny Elgas......which i find very convincing, and moving.

Statement from Penny Elgas
Personal Experience At The Pentagon on September 11, 2001
By Penny Elgas

Traffic was at a standstill. I heard a rumble, looked out my driver's side window and realized that I was looking at the nose of an airplane coming straight at us from over the road (Columbia Pike) that runs perpendicular to the road I was on. The plane just appeared there- very low in the air, to the side of (and not much above) the CITGO gas station that I never knew was there. My first thought was “Oh My God, this must be World War III!”

In that split second, my brain flooded with adrenaline and I watched everything play out in ultra slow motion, I saw the plane coming in slow motion toward my car and then it banked in the slightest turn in front of me, toward the heliport. In the nano-second that the plane was directly over the cars in front of my car, the plane seemed to be not more than 80 feet off the ground and about 4-5 car lengths in front of me. It was far enough in front of me that I saw the end of the wing closest to me and the underside of the other wing as that other wing rocked slightly toward the ground. I remember recognizing it as an American Airlines plane -- I could see the windows and the color stripes. And I remember thinking that it was just like planes in which I had flown many times but at that point it never occurred to me that this might be a plane with passengers.

In my adrenaline-filled state of mind, I was overcome by my visual senses. The day had started out beautiful and sunny and I had driven to work with my car's sunroof open. I believe that I may have also had one or more car windows open because the traffic wasn't moving anyway. At the second that I saw the plane, my visual senses took over completely and I did not hear or feel anything -- not the roar of the plane, or wind force, or impact sounds.

The plane seemed to be floating as if it were a paper glider and I watched in horror as it gently rocked and slowly glided straight into the Pentagon. At the point where the fuselage hit the wall, it seemed to simply melt into the building. I saw a smoke ring surround the fuselage as it made contact with the wall. It appeared as a smoke ring that encircled the fuselage at the point of contact and it seemed to be several feet thick. I later realized that it was probably the rubble of churning bits of the plane and concrete. The churning smoke ring started at the top of the fuselage and simultaneously wrapped down both the right and left sides of the fuselage to the underside, where the coiling rings crossed over each other and then coiled back up to the top. Then it started over again -- only this next time, I also saw fire, glowing fire in the smoke ring. At that point, the wings disappeared into the Pentagon. And then I saw an explosion and watched the tail of the plane slip into the building. It was here that I closed my eyes for a moment and when I looked back, the entire area was awash in thick black smoke.

Full statement here

Larry said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
socrates said...

I answered at least a bit of his Operation Northwoods questions twice. Pretty bizarre. Yeah, sorry for the cursing. But he was getting fairly annoying.

On a funny tangent, check this out. Progressive Independent appears to be shutting down. Tinoire has gone missing, and no one can seem to find her.

I think yours truly was the final straw leading to this pending white walling. I found that post she made claiming to have been military intelligence. She's already well-known for using the scrub brush early and often. I think she has been a form of Hal Turner. He was on the FBI payroll. There's your paystub for internet cointelpro.

I bet those fockers regret ever messing with me, same with those who messed with you. BradBlog is looking like toast. Same with Rigorous Intuition.

He who laughs last, laughs best.

Larry said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
the_last_name_left said...

That's 5 times (in the last few days) Larry has avoided answering the question "Are you an architect?"

And 5 times he has spammed his list of silly hypothetical questions which he "demands" an answer to.

No-one need address your demands to be answered, Larry - as you have refused to answer questions put you......and you have refused consistently, across 6 months or more.

Let me see if I can help you, Larry.....

You said "The physical evidence COMPLETELY supports the fact that what hit the Pentagon was possibly a drone...."

WHat a silly thing to say. Can you even spot the silliness? The logical flaw in your claim?

The physical evidence CANNOT "completely support" the claim that "possibly a drone" hit the Pentagon.

defintely possibly? silly.

And what about the reports of people found inside pentagon - still strapped into their seats.....the ID cards and personal effects found from passengers....Penny Elgas's account.....the firemen....the staff...the first responders....etc etc etc.

Silly.

Larry said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Larry said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
the_last_name_left said...

7 times Larry............you have avoided answering the questions.

Just like you have avoided the questions all the time......and they were first asked in August.

When you are ready to play ball, you can post, until then I will delete all your comments.

You had plenty of chances to address the questions - you have had 6 months+

If you don't answer, you don't get a chance to spam your own silly questions and insults. Sorry - no ballgame with unfair players.

Larry said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Larry said...

By the way, I LOVE that you resort to DELETING---means Im WINNING.

the_last_name_left said...

Larry has avoided a simple direct question for the 9th time now.

I'll leave your previous comment, Larry, because it illustrates what a farking twart you are.

Larry said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
the_last_name_left said...

10

Larry said...

1. IF Northwoods was carried out, do you believe our government would have COVERED IT UP?

2. Do you also believe that the media and politicians would be calling those who questioned Northwoods "crazy conspiracy theorists" and "kooks"?

3. Do you believe they would have called those who questioned Northwoods "traitors" and "un-American"?

4. Or do you believe they would have shouted, "We admit it! We confess! We sank our own ships and painted our own planes to look like Cuban planes and crashed them into our own landmarks! PLEASE send us to prison---PLEASE execute us for treason!"??

Apparently, you believe they would have said the latter since because they dont confess to 9-11, that must mean 9-11 WASNT an inside job!

5. IF Operation Northwoods WAS carried out---tell me, what would have convinced you it was an inside job?

You accept it NOW, because the document has been declassified--that makes it easy to say "yes I believe".

6. But in 1962, what would have convinced you it was a false flag attack? I CANT WAIT for your answer. [IF you answer it]

7. So, you ADMIT Northwoods was REAL [which it was---although never carried out, but planned], but you REJECT that 39 years later, with FAR better technology that NOBODY could have PAINTED American Airlines logos on smaller, drone-like REMOTE CONTROL planes----JUST LIKE it mentions in Northwoods??

8. Operation Northwoods---although never implemented would have been a FALSE FLAG terror attack [INSIDE JOB] done by our OWN country and killed our OWN people---but you REJECT ALL POSSIBILITY that could have happened on 9-11 when there is EVIDENCE out the ASS there IS a cover up????

There was virtually NO wreckage at the Pentagon and the small hole that the "plane" made in the Pentagon clearly indicates it was NOT a massive 757 airplane. There was NO wing damage on the outside of the Pentagon. The official story says the wings "fell off" on impact, but there was NO WINGS laying on the outside of the building in ANY of the pictures----PRE-collapse or AFTER collapse of the roof. The physical evidence COMPLETELY supports the fact that what hit the Pentagon was possibly a drone that may have been PAINTED with the American Airlines logo [which explains why witnesses say they saw the logo---I dont see HOW at that speed]---

9. ---and you believe that Northwoods was real but reject that the Pentagon was done in the SAME Northwoods fashion???

10. Ahhhhh, so in other words, there ARE conspiracies, but ONLY THE ONES YOU ACCEPT are real; if you DONT accept them, they are NOT real. And you say I'M mentally ill?????

Larry said...

I also noticed that The Last FRAUD Left couldnt refute a word of my recent Keith Olbermann story where he LIED about climate change. Whats the matter Last Fraud Left? You hate those cold hard facts? Tell me something assmunch----Olbermann said that climate change is "where its supposed to get warm , it gets warm-ER, and where it's supposed to get cold, it gets cold-ER".

So, how are the ice caps MELTING? How are polar bears dying then? Olbermann said, "where its supposed to get cold, it gets COLD-ER"---so, that would mean the ice caps should be getting COLD-ER then????? Tell me Sherlock, where am I wrong on this one? How will you spin and divert from this?

socrates said...

Richard Gage is an architect. Larry's a wingnut troll.