Karl B SchwarzMoron.
One of the greatest Troofers of all time.
A giant of a ......Troofer.
Schwarz, 54, officially announced his candidacy for President on a public telephone-seminar Thursday night, where hundreds joined him in a question and answer period to map out a strategy to “rid America of the neo-con stranglehold on Washington.”
Schwarz, best known for his 800 age book bashing Bush and the neo-cons, titled “One Way Ticket to Crawford Texas,” has been rallying support and organizing his third party for more than two years, ever since coming on the national scene with his detailed analysis of how the bush administration is actually a “front government” for the New World Order, bent on destroying American democracy under a one world oppressive government.
Concerning terrorism, Schwarz has openly accused the Bush administration of being part and parcel of 9/11, saying it definitely was an inside government job. Since coming forward as a strong Bush critic, Schwarz has been in the forefront of the 9/11 truth movement, pointing out numerous inconsistencies and overt cover-up by the administration to keep the truth from the American people."
Not content with running the country, he also runs nanotechnology. So he said.
Patmos NanoTechnology. Remember them? LOL.
http://karmakat.typepad.com/picasso_dreams/2004/10/karl_schwarz_an.html
33 comments:
And your issue with this guy is what exactly???
So, are you saying that when truthers ask how Bush saw the FIRST plane hit the tower ON 9/11 like he said in speeches a few months later when he was telling kids what he was thinking that day, that's not a VALID question?
Are you suggesting that's not even a valid question to ask...."how did Bush see the FIRST plane hit the tower THAT DAY ON 9/11 like he said he did?"
We all know that NO ONE saw footage of the first plane hit the tower ON the DAY of 9/11. That footage wasn't shown until the NEXT day.
And don't you dare say that Bush just misspoke and actually meant the SECOND tower---because in his speech he said:
"Well, Jordan, you're not going to believe what state I was in when I heard about the terrorist attack. I was in Florida. And my chief of staff, Andy Card -- actually I was in a classroom talking about a reading program that works. And I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower -- the TV was obviously on, and I use to fly myself, and I said, "There's one terrible pilot." And I said, "It must have been a horrible accident." [Dec. 4, 2001]
He OBVIOUSLY meant the FIRST plane in that quote because everyone knew after the second plane hit, it was NOT an "accident", it was an attack.
Bush said on January 5, 2002:
"I was sitting there, and my Chief of Staff -- well, first of all, when we walked into the classroom, I had seen this plane fly into the first building. There was a TV set on..."
So, morons like YOU would say that it's WRONG to just want to know HOW Bush saw footage of the first plane hit? We are "kooks" for simply just wanting to know the answer to that? Is that what you're saying?
The obvious implication in Bush seeing footage of the FIRST plane hitting the WTC ON THE DAY OF 9/11 is that he saw it on some closed circuit TV somewhere, or that he had advance knowledge of it.
How else do you explain Bush stating on at least TWO separate occasions that he saw the FIRST plane hit ON THE DAY of 9/11??
My post---IGNORED. I figured you would ignore it. How could you possibly address it and not agree with me that asking that question about Bush is very legitimate? But, of course, it's MUCH easier for you to ridicule and call us "troofers" instead of investigating it yourself.
What has Bush got to do with Karl B Schwarz?
So, morons like YOU would say that it's WRONG to just want to know HOW Bush saw footage of the first plane hit? We are "kooks" for simply just wanting to know the answer to that? Is that what you're saying?
----------------
No.
I've asked your question before, many times.
I don't know why Bush said it. It certainly does suggest that he saw the first plane hit, somehow.
Bush also seems to reveal a nasty dark humour - "what a terrible pilot". Errr, yeah, George.....hilarious.
So why did he say it? We don't know.
One thing it might reveal is that Bush is simply an incorrigible fabricator.....
It certainly isn't enough to conclude it proves "an inside job".
You'd have to show Bush had been telling the truth about it -- about how he saw what he said he did.
So far as we know, he was just bullshitting.
Funny time for you to start believing Bush?
Did he watch the first plane crash.....when it happened?
Or is he confusing the two? He would have seen the first crash footage after the second - as we all did, and maybe his words and some memory are confused.
He was a bumbling moron at the best of times. Tunnel at the end of the light etc.
I don't know whether that's the reason he claimed what he did.
But it's impossible to rule-out sheer incompetence and/or simple falsification on Bush's part. Come on, it's Dubya FFS/
Unless you have something - anything - to support Bush's apparent claim about seeing the 1st plane.....then why believe him?
Tell me why you believe him on this, but you don't believe the government when they say they have killed Bin Laden?
Because you cherry-pick, all the time, right?
So, I answered your question.
You answer mine?
1) what evidence is there that Bush was speaking honestly and accurately?
2) why do you believe him on this but you don't believe the govt. saying they killed OBL?
"1) what evidence is there that Bush was speaking honestly and accurately?"
Because he clearly made reference to the FIRST plane hitting. If you would have read my post IN FULL like you usually do NOT, you would have seen this comment by me:
And don't you dare say that Bush just misspoke and actually meant the SECOND tower---because in his speech he said:
"Well, Jordan, you're not going to believe what state I was in when I heard about the terrorist attack. I was in Florida. And my chief of staff, Andy Card -- actually I was in a classroom talking about a reading program that works. And I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower -- the TV was obviously on, and I use to fly myself, and I said, "There's one terrible pilot." And I said, "It must have been a horrible accident." [Dec. 4, 2001]
He OBVIOUSLY meant the FIRST plane in that quote because everyone knew after the second plane hit, it was NOT an "accident", it was an attack.
PLUS, he made the same reference SEVERAL times, not just one. I already gavethe answer to your question in my original post----why did you ask thequestion when you already had the answer?
"2) why do you believe him on this but you don't believe the govt. saying they killed OBL?"
Because Bush had NO reason AT THE TIME of saying those things that he was going to be accused by a bunch of conspiracy theorists a year down the road that he may have had foreknowledge of 9-11, so he didnt feel the need to be ambiguous about saying he saw the first plane hit. That's MUCH different than your ordinary outright lie that can be easily debunked. He was making a comment that he didn't realize at the time that he had to keep hush hush, until conspiracies began to mount after he made the comment.
As for Bin Laden----I have already told you this answer too. I don't believe hardly ANYTHING the government tells me as an entity. Individual people [like Bush] are a different matter, but government official stories are almost always, for the most part, FALSE.
They dumped his body at sea and LIED and said that dumping a body at sea is Muslim practice---lol. For one, why would OUR government give a shit about respecting the Muslim religion when we have been attacking these people for 8 years now? Second, they LIED and said the Muslim custom is sea burial---lie. That is only when you DIE AT SEA. Plus, they havent got their story straight. They said Bin Laden fought back, then they said he was unarmed. First they said he used his wife as a human shield, then they said he didnt. Lie after lie after lie. Then we were told that the mission was being monitored by members of the Obama administration [in that picture where they are all watching a screen]----THEN CIA director Leon Pinetta said they were NOT watching it. Then they don't release the pictures and they tell us they don't want to inflame his supporters. Why would they give a shit about that? Invading his country doesn't inflame them enough? LOL
We have NO body and we can't see the pictures. Kinda reminds me of the time Davin Coburn told Charles Goyette that POPULAR MECHANICS had permission to see pictures of WTC 7 supposed "giant gash"---but yet we, the general public can't. Hmmm. I wonder why.
The question for YOU is: Why do you believe government stories so easily when they have such a colossal track record of LYING?
Another question: Why didn't we CAPTURE Bin Laden instead of kill him?
I read the other day that killing Bin Laden was against the law--but the US has a long track record of violating laws too, so what the hell?
By the way, love how you ignored my responses to you on my blog too.
You asked:
"What has Bush got to do with Karl B Schwarz?"
Jesus, are you THAT dumb? In your story you said:
"Concerning terrorism, Schwarz has openly accused the Bush administration of being part and parcel of 9/11, saying it definitely was an inside government job. Since coming forward as a strong Bush critic, Schwarz has been in the forefront of the 9/11 truth movement, pointing out numerous inconsistencies and overt cover-up by the administration to keep the truth from the American people."
You MENTIONED Bush in the freaking story! And you ask me what Bush has to do with him????? JESUS!!!!
they LIED and said the Muslim custom is sea burial---lie.
-------------------------
No, they said burial within 24 hours was Muslim custom - not burial at sea.
lol.
---
Larry: "He OBVIOUSLY meant the FIRST plane....."
----------------
Sure, it seems that way.
But you don't know that what he said is what happened.
How do you know that what Bush said happened......heppened?
Tell me before we move on?
"No, they said burial within 24 hours was Muslim custom - not burial at sea."
LIE. That was the whole reason for the SEA burial asshole! If it was a 24 hour thing, they could have buried him ANYWHERE.
"Sure, it seems that way.
But you don't know that what he said is what happened."
Because he SAID HE SAW THE FIRST PLANE HIT. HE SAID THOSE WORDS.
Enough for you??
As usual---I answer YOUR questions and you refuse to answer mine. So, here they are again:
The question for YOU is: Why do you believe government stories so easily when they have such a colossal track record of LYING?
Another question: Why didn't we CAPTURE Bin Laden instead of kill him?
My questions IGNORED AGAIN. LOL!
It's CLEAR that you can't debunk my posts, so you just IGNORE them.
That's your tactic: You either completely IGNORE a post of mine, or when you DO respond, you chop up my quote and OMIT the MAIN point I was making.
You dishonest asscrack.
You continue to IGNORE IGNORE IGNORE IGNORE! It must really piss you off that someone you claim is a "nut" and "kook" forces you to IGNORE so many facts [which is the reason for your silence]. If I'm wrong----ANSWER ME THEN!
How do you know that what Bush said happened......heppened?
Tell me before we move on?
See, this is how I always know I have your stupid ass backed into a corner: When you REPEAT THE SAME FUCKING POST OVER AND OVER AND OVER even when I actually DID address your ORIGINAL post!!
You said this on May 24:
"How do you know that what Bush said happened......heppened?"
I ANSWERED you, you fucking DICKFACE. I said this:
"Because he SAID HE SAW THE FIRST PLANE HIT. HE SAID THOSE WORDS.
Enough for you??"
So, you IGNORE my answer for NINE fucking days and come back and REPEAT your original post AS IF I NEVER ADDRESSED IT. YOU ARE A FUCKING LYING, DISINFORMATIONIST FRAUD!
You don't understand Larry.
The issue is not whether Bush said it.
The issue is whether what he said was accurate, or not.
And here's the crucial bit Larry - you do not know whether what he said was accurate or not.
Man, you are one crazy loon.
"The issue is not whether Bush said it.
The issue is whether what he said was accurate, or not.
And here's the crucial bit Larry - you do not know whether what he said was accurate or not."
He stated on SEVERAL DIFFERENT OCCASIONS that he saw the FIRST PLANE HIT THAT DAY [THE DAY OF 9/11]. If he had said it just ONCE, one could assume he may have been mistaken---but here's the part that makes it IMPOSSIBLE to conclude that he made an error:
He said SPECIFICALLY...
"And I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower -- the TV was obviously on, and I use to fly myself, and I said, "There's one terrible pilot." And I said, "It must have been a horrible accident."
Everyone knew when the SECOND plane hit that it was NOT an accident anymore. The SECOND plane indicated it was an intentional attack, unless a loon like YOU would believe TWO pilots fell asleep in the cockpit on the very same day in the very same city.
So, for Bush to say on SEVERAL DIFFERENT OCCASIONS that he saw THE FIRST PLANE HIT---indicated by the fact that he called it PILOT ERROR----he is essentially saying that either he knew IN ADVANCE of the attacks, OR he saw th first plane hit THAT DAY on some closed circuit TV.
After all, read the above quote again---he said he was SITTING OUTSIDE WAITING TO GO IN. So he wasn't in the classroom yet---so was this closed circuit TV in his limo????
I don't even know what you mean by saying "whether what he said was accurate, or not". You're just playing word games becaue youre too goddamned stupid to accept the fact that what Bush said makes NO SENSE unless he KNEW about the attacks in advance or he saw the first plane hit on a closed circuit TV.
What exactly are you referring to by the words "...was accurate or not"??? That he SAW the plane hit? He fucking SAID he saw it!
Yes, it IS ACCURATE that the FIRST PLANE HIT A TOWER---and Bush said HE SAW THAT PLANE HIT.
What don't you get, dipshit??
You just can't grasp it can you?
You do not know whether what Bush said happened ....happened.
You can pretend all you like that it is so....but it ain't necessarily so. Not at all.
A common fallacy of yours - Bush said XYZ, so XYZ must be true.
And when it serves you to believe otherwise, you disbelieve everything the government says.
Cherry-picking.
Why do you totally believe Bush about this, but not about anything else?
No answer.........
"You do not know whether what Bush said happened ....happened."
Hey DUMBASS!!!!! I just got done ADDRESSING that VERY SPECIFIC post-----so you post it AGAIN?????? I JUST FUCKING ADDRESSED IT!
I don't KNOW whether what Bush said happened...happened?????
HUH??????????
HE SAID HE SAW THE FIRST PLANE GO IN. GUESS WHAT???? A FIRST PLANE ACTUALLY DID GO IN----REMEMBER? It was on 9/11...TWO planes hit, REMEMBER??? ONE plane went in, and then a SECOND plane went in----CORRECT???
HE SAID HE SAW THE FIRST PLANE GO IN. Your comment is gobbleygook---it has NO meaning whatsoever.
Bush SAID he saw the FIRST plane go in. He called it "PILOT ERROR"----that means he was NOT referring to the SECOND plane, because EVERYONE knows [except for YOU] that the SECOND plane was NOT "PILOT ERROR".
GET IT NOW????
God, you are the stupidest fucker I have EVER spoken to.
Yes, Bush said it.
Very good, Larry.
But it doesn't mean that is what happened.
You keep failing to understand this very simple point.
"But it doesn't mean that is what happened."
So, TWO planes did NOT fly into the World Trade Center?????
Please tell us your alternate story.
Are you saying TWO planes did NOT hit the WTC??? Yes or no???
irrelevant.
You have no way of knowing whether what Bush said was true and accurate.
Go back and read your first posts on this thread - see how mistaken you were?
I am ADDRESSING your fucking posts ASSHOLE.
Are you saying TWO planes did NOT hit the WTC??? Yes or no???
Answer the fucking question. You KEEP SAYING I HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING WHETHER WHAT BUSH SAID WAS TRUE--------
Did two planes NOT hit the twin towers???
YES OR NO, DIPSHIT!
Let m give you a hint:
If your answer is NO, then you're a kook and believe in some alternate story of 9/11
If YES, then you are ADMITTING that my deduction about Bush is CORRECT, that he was talking about THE FIRST PLANE hitting-----and that ACTUALLY DID HAPPEN---and he said HE SAW IT. MORON.
L: If YES, then you are ADMITTING that my deduction about Bush is CORRECT
-----------
Rubbish.
Your deduction is completely unreasonable.
You do not know whether what Bush said happened actually did happen.
Just because he said it, in no ways means that is what must have happened.
It's simple - but your crazed reverse logic is so rigid that you think Bush's saying it MUST mean it happened as he said, therefore xyz, abc.
You insist he must be speaking the truth in this instance, yet elsewhere you say you believe nothing government ever says.....simply because it's the government.
It's kind of astonishing you can't recognise such a contradiction. But such contradictions appear right throughout your perspective, so it's a general problem of yours, not one reserved to just this issue.
Fuck you asshole. I address your fucking comments WORD FOR WORD and you keep posting the SAME fucking post OVER AND OVER.
Instead of just repeating the same SHIT over and over, TELL ME EXACTLY what I fail to understand instead of just SAYING I don't understand it.
I'm all ears.
"You insist he must be speaking the truth in this instance, yet elsewhere you say you believe nothing government ever says.....simply because it's the government."
I addressed this before you fucking peckerhead. Here was my response:
"As for Bin Laden----I have already told you this answer too. I don't believe hardly ANYTHING the government tells me as an entity. Individual people [like Bush] are a different matter, but government official stories are almost always, for the most part, FALSE." [May 24]
"It's simple - but your crazed reverse logic is so rigid that you think Bush's saying it MUST mean it happened as he said, therefore xyz, abc."
So, TWO PLANES DID NOT FLY INTO THE WTC????????????
PLEASE TELL ME WHAT REALLY HAPPENED THEN???????
So, Larry.......what do you make of Karl B Schwarz?
I see you're back to deleting comments again. Why would a person who claims to have the full truth feel the need to delete comments of someone they claim to be a kook?
Scared of the "kook"? LOL
Will you EVER answer my above questions?
"So, TWO PLANES DID NOT FLY INTO THE WTC????????????
PLEASE TELL ME WHAT REALLY HAPPENED THEN???????"
and
"Instead of just repeating the same SHIT over and over, TELL ME EXACTLY what I fail to understand instead of just SAYING I don't understand it."
Or will I be DELETED again? LOL
I'll delete more comments too if you keep up with your potty mouth.
Why do I have to explain what happened? Of course two planes hit WTC.
Quite what Bush was on about is anyone's guess.
But it's a guess, whatever it is.
That's what you can't understand.
You wrongly insist that Bush must have been speaking honestly and accurately, and that what he said happened must have happened.
The most obvious explanation is that Bush was simply wrong - for whatever reason. He's a liar? A compulsive embroiderer of anecdotes? He got events jumbled up because he was doubtless a pretty busy and tired guy in those hours? Who knows? I don't. Nor do you.
But you're simply being stupid to insist Bush must have been speaking accurately and honestly.
Typical conspiracist bullshit - totally fucked-up reasoning and abysmal treatment of evidence.
Because you can use Bush's words here to pursue your prejudice that it was a conspiracy then you choose to absolutely believe him.
You believe him this time simply because you think it supports your conspiracy theory --- just as in general you don't believe conspiracy because of the evidence, you cherry-pick evidence which you believe supports your prejudice.
CTers do this in awful cringeworthy fashion. Astonishing they can't see it in themselves.
Karl B Schwarz was laughably included as an expert reference for Loose Change.
That's the standard of CTers "expertise". Laughable.
"Why do I have to explain what happened? Of course two planes hit WTC."
So you ADMIT two planes hit the WTC??? Funny, that's EXACTLY what BUSH said happened! But that doesnt stop you from saying OVER AND OVER:
"You do not know whether what Bush said happened actually did happen."
"You wrongly insist that Bush must have been speaking honestly and accurately, and that what he said happened must have happened."
So you're saying Bush intentionally LIED to people and said he saw the first plane hit when he really didn't??? And why did he feel the need to do this BEFORE all the conspiracy theories began about 9/11???
Hmmmmmmm??????
"The most obvious explanation is that Bush was simply wrong - for whatever reason. He's a liar? A compulsive embroiderer of anecdotes? He got events jumbled up because he was doubtless a pretty busy and tired guy in those hours? Who knows? I don't. Nor do you."
That's EXACTLY my point dickhead. He COULDN'T HAVE BEEN MISTAKEN. He said he saw the FIRST plane hit and called it PILOT ERROR. He said this on several occasions in the months following 9/11. He COULDN'T HAVE been referring to the SECOND plane while calling it PILOT ERROR----EVERYONE knew that was an official ATTACK then.
Do you need flash cards??
"But you're simply being stupid to insist Bush must have been speaking accurately and honestly."
Ahhh, I see. So if the "conspiracy theorists" take someone out of context or misquote them, we are nutty kooks, but if we QUOTE THEIR WORDS VERBATIM, we are STILL nutty kooks????? LOL.
When we state FACTS and someone's EXACT words, then we must give them the benefit of the doubt and just assume they fucked up??? LOL.
"You believe him this time simply because you think it supports your conspiracy theory"
Wrong asshole. It's UNANSWERED questions such as these that create my suspicion. I DO NOT automatically believe in a conspiracy and then cherry-pick quotes to suit my beliefs. Some do that...I don't.
The irony here is that it's people EXACTLY like YOU that create my views and my suspicions. When I cite my beliefs, you call it bullshit, but FAIL to refute me. YOUR response is to repeat the same post and same questions over and over....THEN when I ask you "OK, tell me what I fail to understand"....your response is:
"Why do I have to explain what happened?"
So, in other words. You call me nuts, but have NEVER EVER refuted me once, then, to appease you I ask where I am wrong since you accuse me of "not getting it"----then you say "why do I have to explain it"?
LOL. Isn't it funny that YOU, who claim to have all the fucking answers and facts CONTINUALLY avoid answering questions...and then when we get no answers, even from fucksticks like YOU, let alone from the government...you actually find it ODD that we develop suspicions---when YOU cannot and WILL NOT provide answers???
You are a fucking stupid-ass dipshit.
ahhhh yes, STILL ignored.
Post a Comment