This staggeringly important Kos entry rips apart the cover story surrounding the so-called "accident" in Oakland. Don't tell me you really bought that story about a truck hitting a freeway pylon? That's just what Bush WANTS you to believe, naive fool! And if we have learned anything from 9-11, it is that FIRE CAN NEVER MELT STEEL. I mean, if jet fuel burning in an enclosed space had no effect on the steel in the twin towers, it is obvious that simply gasoline burning below an overpass could never get hot enough to effect the steel in the freeway, yet they expect us to believe...No freeway overpass in history has ever previously collapsed due to fire. And since it never happened before, obviously, it could not have happened in Oakland. The "official" story defies the laws of physics -- ask any physicist. Moreover, Kos diarist ETinKC has compiled HARD AND CONCLUSIVE PROOF that photos of the scene have been faked.Engineers said the green steel frame of the I-580 overpass and the bolts holding the frame together began to melt and bend in the intense heat - and that movement pulled the roadbed off its supports.
Fortunately, a group called Associated Scholars & Scientists For Acquisition of Conspiracy Evidence is looking into the matter. They have already fingered a likely suspect: Phil Spector. Remember when he ruined "Long and Winding Road" all those years ago? The pattern is obvious...
26 comments:
LOL. Yes, thank goodness, as you point out, that ASSFACE is on the case. :)
Yeh, great, you opened this up.
I noticed the freeway concrete didn't disintegrate and cover the land to the horizon. I noticed the freeway didn't collapse, obliterated into it's own footprint. I noticed there wasn't a rush to ship the remains to China and, most importantly, I noticed that the uncanny didn't happen twice, excuse me, three times in a single day.
I'm disappointed you snark about crap like that you sniveling fool.
(w/respect and in good humor).
Sorry, from the previous post. I may have misplaced the irony. Good show.
Hard to keep up with who's saying what, when.
I want to make a few points crystal clear to newcomers:
I'm older than you probably are, I’ve been an info-junkie for as long as you’ve been alive, and it is unlikely that you can teach me ANYTHING.
I know the conspiracy-buff milieu and mindset very well -- TOO well. I have, over the years -- and decades -- become skeptical about a lot of the material coming out of that milieu. Conspiracism is really just another form of religion, another temple where believers mouth a mindless catechism.
This is a political site, not a conspiracy site. I know that sometimes it appears to be the latter -- but Alex Jones I AIN'T.
Let me make this loud and clear: I am 100% OPPOSED to most of the crap coming out of the so-called 911 "truth" movement. I call the controlled demolition buffs by the derisive name "tranny," a term suggested by a ladyfriend.
("Controlled demolition believer" = "CD-er" = "tranny." If you're still confused, ask someone hipper than you are what the terms "tranny" and "CD" mean in the sexual underground.)
I feel that the trannies are not just wrong -- they are EVIL.
There are numerous legitimate questions to arise from the events of that day -- I always direct readers to the continuing work of Daniel Hopsicker and to the film "911: Press for Truth." But every time someone tries to address those issues in public, the trannies take over the dialog and foist their pseudoscientific crap on the public.
I allowed them free reign on this blog for a while and their behavior was just -- appalling. Look at the insult and abuse I suffered in the comments last year. Look at the amount of sheer CRAP they kept posting. No human being should have to take that nonsense. I will NEVER reform my opinion of the trannies, based on those experiences. I will always despise all of them.
This blog is not a public place; it is my home.
Why should I open up my home to people who behave so poorly?
I found that I cannot engage in dialogue with the trannies because they tend to demand that I write the equivalent of an entire book in one night. And it is always the SAME book, night after night -- because they never read what I wrote before, and they never used this blog’s intra-site search function, so I keep on having to address the SAME issues.
I know that, right now, you want to jump in and say: "Well, what about...?" And then you are going to talk about WT7 or something else that has been addressed already.
Again: Use the Search function.
You should also use the links at the bottom of the left hand column.
So -- sorry -- I will not engage you in dialog. If you attempt to prosyletise the doctrines of trannyism, your comment will be deleted immediately. I've been there and done that and just ain't doin' it again.
If I allow ONE tranny to speak then they ALL have to speak. And then I will have to respond. And then -- once again -- I will find myself forced spend five, six, seven hours A DAY writing about 911 issues. Which disallows me from writing about other issues, and which also disallows me from earning a living.
Besides -- this may be difficult for you to believe, but it is true -- you almost certainly do not have anything to say to me that I have not already heard.
You also had better wrap your head around this: I honestly believe that the entire tranny movement is a deliberate lie created by right-wingers. Look at the histories of Jim Marrs, Alex Jones, Chris Bollyn, and a host of other tranny luminaries, including tranny money-man Adnan Khashoggi.
I do not consider Creationists or Holocaust deniers worthy of debate. I would never allow a Nazi or a Stalinist a voice on this blog, just as I would not allow them to set foot in my physical home.
Yes, I really do consider trannies to be THAT evil. And I will never apologize for that opinion.
And I will not cease addressing 9/11 issues. Why should I let evil people win?
If my rules seem intolerable to you, I understand. Simply GO.
You have plenty of other sites receptive to your message.
I am not one of those bloggers who tries his damnedest each day to build an audience. I like a small, polite audience.
I earn no money from this, except for the Adsense ads. Ask around and you'll see how little THEY bring in; it comes to the equivalent of meal out once a month. The other ads are free.
So if you don't like my rules, or if you cannot tolerate my refusal to recite the catechism, or if you dislike my skepticism whenever someone tries to hit me over the head with a bag of conspiracy-buff cliches -- just go. Toddle off to Alex Jones or Rigorous Intuition and blast "that Cannon guy" as a disinfo agent because I hurt your poor widdle feelings.
Again, this is not a public place. You will behave as a guest or you will be forced outside. You were never invited to come here. Nobody requested your presence. Why on earth would you stay inside a man’s home when you are not welcome?
And if you DO speak -- try to SURPRISE me. Hell, I'll allow even the trannies (or even Nazis) the occasional word or two if they can actually manage to say it in a truly novel way. Iambic pentameter. Acrostics. Anything but the usual catechism.
what a dick you are cannon
I read that news article last night and thought, "uh-oh, I can see Joseph warming up right now!"
As one who has been agnostic on the CD hypothesis, I have to say that this event does give strong evidence against the assertion of CD'ers that jet fuel won't melt steel. But let's hear reasoned argument instead of name-calling and sarcasm, okay?
sofla said...
For another, better IMO poke at the truthers' movements, see the "Titanic truth" movement's film, Loose Change style, at rense.com. (It's in the last of the first paragraphs' section, in 'videos.')
It's hilarious, full of non-sequitur reasoning, idiotic points, and etc., including that steel is stronger than ice. For example, take ice cubes on a plate alongside steel forks. After a while, the ice will have melted fully, while the forks hardly melt at all!!!! (an actual part of the film-- great yucks indeed).
Now I should add that there may indeed be valid questions about the sinking of the Titanic, many of which questions are in the points of hilarity these jokesters ridicule. Entirely true things can be made to appear ridiculous with the right treatment applied by talented 'debunkers.' And equally so, a barren conspiracy claim with no actually sound points at all can be made to appear sinister by a similar (if opposite) technique.
As to conspiracy 'theories,' not only do they exist, but some are actually true. Many of which true conspiracy theories were so outlandish at first blush that a 'sensible citizen' would immediately dismiss them as impossible. COINTELPRO comes to mind, for how could such a wide-ranging effort of the Feds to infiltrate and suborn peace movements across the board be kept quiet, with all those FBI guys in the know not leaking?
But, as anyone paying attention knows, conspiracies occur every day, across most strata of society, and including very importantly at the top levels of politics and finance.
Joe's fine work on the US-As' firings shows one such elaborate conspiracy rather starkly. And, in a rarity, if those RNC e-mails are finally obtained, we may see the actual conspirators conspiring in writing.
I'm going to let that one comment -- "what a dick you are cannon" (no punctuation, no capitalization, from a boldly anonymous reader) stay, since it exemplifies the brilliant methods of argument employed by the other trannies. Why would I allow such awful people in my home? And why would I consider them worthy of "reasoned argument"?
Now, if I had decided to barge into a man's home and insult the host, I would at least have tried to be witty about it. A Socratic dialog, haiku, a filthy limerick...
One last thought: My reference to Rigorous Intuition was prompted by some of the things said by the users of the reader forums. I have nothing against Jeff Wells. I think he's a good writer, although his areas of interest do not always converge with mine.
Don't think that I've taken out any commentary that was wise, witty or well-put. One of the things that bothers me about the trannies is their inability to express themselves. These guys talk like they're trying out for the role of "Lenny" in a dinner theater production of "Of Mice and Men."
"Duuuhhh...tell me about the missile dat hit da Pentagon again, George."
"Lenny, I already told you that story a thousand times. You know it by heart."
"Duhhhhhhh...I know, George, but I like da way you tell it!"
ugly, man. this isn't sardonic, it's opprobrious.
chris, I don't know if you were slamming me or the guys who hate me. But at least you didn't sound like yet another Lenny. So your words can stay, and you are welcome to comment again.
Post a Comment