View Full Version : NitWit Gets Front Page on Michelle's Blog
OldTigerCub
7th November 2007, 10:19 PM
It's been a long few days at work, and I have not had much of a chance to delve into my favorite forum, but I did get a brief chance to hit the major blogs on the net. Michelle Malkin's "Picture of the day" just made my week, and consequently, I have to share it. It seems troother idiocy has not gone unnoticed by the grassroots:
From Michelle Malkin's blog (http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/06/reader-photo-of-the-day/)
http://michellemalkin.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/1nitwit002.jpg
The pic is a little dated, according to Michelle, but just the fact that it made a mainstream and major blog says something about what the real world is thinking.
CptColumbo
7th November 2007, 10:21 PM
That put a smile on my face. :)
Gravy
7th November 2007, 10:30 PM
The add-on "s" is wonderful.
Brainster
7th November 2007, 10:38 PM
Ah, the hazards of making signs while stoned! ;)
CptColumbo
7th November 2007, 10:42 PM
How does one make the leap from the planes not being flown by Muslims to them therefore being piloted by remote control? Did he take a particularly poorly worded multiple choice quiz and is trying to dispute his grade?
Bell
7th November 2007, 10:49 PM
The add-on "s" is wonderful.
I was thinking the same thing. What is it with troofers not being able to fit their text nicely on a piece of cardboard.
gtc
7th November 2007, 10:57 PM
In grade school we learnt to pencil in anything you were drawing before going over it in pen.
Clearly the education system is failing these people.
bofors
7th November 2007, 11:30 PM
How does one make the leap from the planes not being flown by Muslims to them therefore being piloted by remote control?
With the exception of Japanese, nobody else is known for suicide missions.
Duh.... stundie.... whatever.... :confused:
Hokulele
7th November 2007, 11:32 PM
With the exception of Japanese, nobody else is known for suicide missions.
Yeah, there are no suicide bombers in the Middle East at all.
[/heavy sarcasm]
bofors
7th November 2007, 11:35 PM
Clearly the education system is failing these people.
You can't figure out that 9/11 was an inside job?
Sorry, but it looks like the education system failed you.
Did you even take any physics classes outside of high school?
bofors
7th November 2007, 11:36 PM
Yeah, there are no suicide bombers in the Middle East at all.
That's right, and those people would be Muslim wouldn't they?
Hokulele
7th November 2007, 11:37 PM
:confused:
qarnos
7th November 2007, 11:46 PM
With the exception of Japanese, nobody else is known for suicide missions.
:eye-poppi
gtc
7th November 2007, 11:54 PM
With the exception of Japanese, nobody else is known for suicide missions.
Duh.... stundie.... whatever.... :confused:
I think you are confused by what CPT Columbo said.
Also have you heard about the Tamil Tigers?
You can't figure out that 9/11 was an inside job?
No credible evidence has been presented to me to show that 9/11 was an inside job.
Do you have any credible evidence? You don't appear to have posted any evidence here, let alone credible evidence and you don't appear to have made any specific claims.
Why don't you provide the piece of evidence that most suggests an inside job and we can discuss it.
Sorry, but it looks like the education system failed you.
At least I can colour between the lines.
Did you even take any physics classes outside of high school?
Yes. Did you?
CptColumbo
8th November 2007, 12:06 AM
With the exception of Japanese, nobody else is known for suicide missions.
Duh.... stundie.... whatever.... :confused:"Off the top of my head" the German used Kamikazi-like tactics in WWII. Look up Selbstopfer.
Go further back and you will find Suicide attacks exist in many cultures.
Brainster
8th November 2007, 12:39 AM
How does one make the leap from the planes not being flown by Muslims to them therefore being piloted by remote control? Did he take a particularly poorly worded multiple choice quiz and is trying to dispute his grade?
It seems really stupid, but it's an inevitable fallback position and is endorsed by Captain Sherlock, an actual (currently not flying) Northwest Airlines pilot who might just be the nuttiest person in 9-11 Denial.
Suppose we finally beat them down on the Airfone calls. Dylan's there and David Ray Griffin's taking a terrific pounding. What's next?
It almost has to be remote-controlled planes to keep it in the realm of MIHOP. See, the government knew these guys were going to hijack these planes, see? The hijackers' plan was a standard hijacking and a demand for the release of various prisoners, including the original WTC bombers. But when the patsy pilots got into the captain's chair, they were horrified to discover that they had no control over the planes. And instead they had to watch as their planes crashed, thereby fulfilling the requirement of a "New Pearl Harbor".
The only other real way to go is claim that the US had some sort of commando squad that imitated hijackers, gassed the passengers then bailed out as the planes were flown via either remote control or homing beacon to their targets.
This is why the calls are so critical, because the Troofers will have to abandon a lot of their positions if they accept the calls. And that's why this guy is pushing remote control. Some of these people know how to play chess and they're already on the next move.
beachnut
8th November 2007, 01:01 AM
You can't figure out that 9/11 was an inside job?
Sorry, but it looks like the education system failed you.
Did you even take any physics classes outside of high school?
Funny; nitwit; I agree, truthers are nitwits. They have no facts or evidence to solve 9/11. They just have lies. Why?
uk_dave
8th November 2007, 01:16 AM
Some of these people know how to play chess and they're already on the next move.
I think you're giving them way too much credit there.
It always seems to me that the fundamental flaw in 'truther-think' is that they don't.
They always appear to be reacting and making it up on the hoof.
Take the remote controlled planes issue:
For 'truthers' it can't have been fundamentalist muslim extremists because-
a. They don't have the wherewithall (read: Intelligence) to attack the worlds only superpower
b. There mustn't be anyone other than the evil 'NWO' with a motive for the attacks
c. It's too scary to believe that a fanatical religion could create individuals capable of such acts, whereas it's kinda comforting to imagine an all controlling, all powerful, shadowy elite which could carry out such attacks and blame others for it, just as with their own lives when they find things go wrong or they themselves fail/suffer through their own incompetence/laziness/lack of intelligence, it can actually be pinned on this evil 'NWO' and they can abdicate any responsibility.
But, the shadowy, evil 'NWO', being of a non-religious persuasion, can't actually get any operatives to sacrifice their own lives for the cause, so if planes were flown into the buildings on 9-11, those planes must have been controlled externally.
Further to this, in typical 'truther' mental gymnastics, if the plane which hit the pentagon was being flown in a manner which could be described as 'odd' then it follows that a pilot couldn't have flown the plane so it must have been remote control (ignoring, of course, the fact that if the plane could fly in the manner described it doesn't really matter whether it was a pilot in the cockpit or a pilot in a room on the ground; the plane did it therefore it must have been possible in either circumstance).
Chess players? :lolsign:
Dave Rogers
8th November 2007, 02:37 AM
Did you even take any physics classes outside of high school?
Yes. Did you? And what did they tell you about the Second Law of Thermodynamics?
Dave
chillzero
8th November 2007, 05:49 AM
So... help me out here...
The planes were not piloted by Muslims.. because apparently only Japan has suicide bombers.
... except that the Middle East has suicide bombers on the news regularly also....
... but they are Muslim....
...so they could not have been flying the plane(s) ...
... because only Japan is noted for suicide bombing?
Is that it?
TheRedWorm
8th November 2007, 06:02 AM
Logic Radius = 0
technoextreme
8th November 2007, 06:30 AM
With the exception of Japanese, nobody else is known for suicide missions.
Duh.... stundie.... whatever.... :confused:
It's been well documented that the Germans ran suicide/Odds against you surviving missions during WWII. Go read a history book.
uk_dave
8th November 2007, 06:35 AM
So... help me out here...
The planes were not piloted by Muslims.. because apparently only Japan has suicide bombers.
uh huh
... except that the Middle East has suicide bombers on the news regularly also....
You believe the news?
... but they are Muslim....
or mossad....
...so they could not have been flying the plane(s) ...
uh huh
... because only Japan is noted for suicide bombing?
Welllll, if we could somehow prove that the japanese pilots didn't actually intend to commit suicide but were actually duped into doing so by faulty equipment which could then be sourced back to an american owned company.......
Is that it?
Oh I'm sure there's more.
:D
apathoid
8th November 2007, 07:03 AM
So... help me out here...
The planes were not piloted by Muslims.. because apparently only Japan has suicide bombers.
... except that the Middle East has suicide bombers on the news regularly also....
... but they are Muslim....
...so they could not have been flying the plane(s) ...
... because only Japan is noted for suicide bombing?
Is that it?
Isn't twoofer logic fascinating? I suppose bofors next post will be something like "...but when have Muslims ever used airplains as suicide weapons before 9/11? That's right. Never. What are the odds of it happening 4 times in a day...LOLZ. Sheaple."
brodski
8th November 2007, 07:07 AM
With the exception of Japanese, nobody else is known for suicide missions.
Duh.... stundie.... whatever.... :confused:
That's incorrect. The greatest number of suicide bombing missions have been carried out by a group which is neither Japanese nor Islamic.
CHF
8th November 2007, 07:16 AM
That's right, and those people would be Muslim wouldn't they?
Yeah, I think so.
Unless the Japanese are now suicide-bombing Iraq dressed up as Muslims.
SDC
8th November 2007, 07:21 AM
How does one make the leap from the planes not being flown by Muslims to them therefore being piloted by remote control? Did he take a particularly poorly worded multiple choice quiz and is trying to dispute his grade?
Actually, the modern use of suicide bombing (with human delivery systems, so to speak) was pioneered by the Tamil Tigers movement in Sri Lanka. Which is not Muslim, I believe.
defaultdotxbe
8th November 2007, 07:22 AM
With the exception of Japanese, nobody else is known for suicide missions.
Duh.... stundie.... whatever.... :confused:
prior to WW2 the japanese were not known for suicide attacks, therefore all kamikazis and kaitens must have been remote controlled
Dave Rogers
8th November 2007, 07:31 AM
Unless the Japanese are now suicide-bombing Iraq dressed up as Muslims.
So why exactly can't Japanese people convert to Islam? Huh? Huh?
Dave
Gravy
8th November 2007, 07:39 AM
So... help me out here...
The planes were not piloted by Muslims.. because apparently only Japan has suicide bombers.
... except that the Middle East has suicide bombers on the news regularly also....
... but they are Muslim....
...so they could not have been flying the plane(s) ...
... because only Japan is noted for suicide bombing?
Is that it?
Well, if we're talking specifically about aircraft suicide bombings/attempts/plots, there are Richard Reid (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Colvin_Reid), Lya Jamal, (http://www.thepanamanews.com/pn/v_10/issue_18/news_03.html) Aminat Nagayeva, Satsia Dzhebirkhanova, (http://edition.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/09/15/russia.planecrash/) and the London airline suicide bomb plotters (http://www.boston.com/news/world/europe/articles/2006/08/21/eleven_uk_bomb_plot_suspects_charged_prosecutor_11 56175201/?rss_id=Boston.com+%2F+News).
And if we're talking about using or plotting to use a plane as the suicide/murder weapon, in addition to the 9/11 hijackers there are Samuel Byck (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Byck), Nikola Kavaja (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikola_Kavaja), Auburn Calloway (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FedEx_Flight_705), Gameel Al-Batouti (http://www.ntsb.gov/Publictn/2002/aab0201.htm), and possibly the hijackers of Air France Flight 8969 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_8969).
Wowbagger
8th November 2007, 07:46 AM
You can't figure out that 9/11 was an inside job?
Sorry, but it looks like the education system failed you. If so, I guess that means the education system must have also (ironically) failed some of the best educated people in the world.
NoZed Avenger
8th November 2007, 07:47 AM
So... help me out here...
The planes were not piloted by Muslims.. because apparently only Japan has suicide bombers.
... except that the Middle East has suicide bombers on the news regularly also....
... but they are Muslim....
...so they could not have been flying the plane(s) ...
... because only Japan is noted for suicide bombing?
Is that it?
I think I have it!
JAPAN = Suicide Pilots.
JAPAN = Pearl Habor
9/11 = New Pearl Harbor
New Pearl Harbor = Suicide pilots
Suicide Pilots = JAPAN
Jaopan therefore obviously carried out 9/11 as the "new Pearl Harbor."
QED.
defaultdotxbe
8th November 2007, 07:53 AM
Jaopan therefore obviously carried out 9/11 as the "new Pearl Harbor."
QED.
must have been, since the chinpokomon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinpokomon) plot failed
Pookster
8th November 2007, 08:20 AM
So... help me out here...
The planes were not piloted by Muslims.. because apparently only Japan has suicide bombers.
... except that the Middle East has suicide bombers on the news regularly also....
... but they are Muslim....
...so they could not have been flying the plane(s) ...
... because only Japan is noted for suicide bombing?
Is that it?
That seems to be it. Congratualtions! It looks like the education system hasn't failed you. :clap: :D
chillzero
8th November 2007, 08:35 AM
That seems to be it. Congratualtions! It looks like the education system hasn't failed you. :clap: :D
Colour me relieved :cool:
Newtons Bit
8th November 2007, 08:40 AM
Well, if we're talking specifically about aircraft suicide bombings/attempts/plots, there are Richard Reid (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Colvin_Reid), Lya Jamal, (http://www.thepanamanews.com/pn/v_10/issue_18/news_03.html) Aminat Nagayeva, Satsia Dzhebirkhanova, (http://edition.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/09/15/russia.planecrash/) and the London airline suicide bomb plotters (http://www.boston.com/news/world/europe/articles/2006/08/21/eleven_uk_bomb_plot_suspects_charged_prosecutor_11 56175201/?rss_id=Boston.com+%2F+News).
And if we're talking about using or plotting to use a plane as the suicide/murder weapon, in addition to the 9/11 hijackers there are Samuel Byck (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Byck), Nikola Kavaja (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikola_Kavaja), Auburn Calloway (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FedEx_Flight_705), Gameel Al-Batouti (http://www.ntsb.gov/Publictn/2002/aab0201.htm), and possibly the hijackers of Air France Flight 8969 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_8969).
Let's not forget self-immolating Tibetan monks.
A W Smith
8th November 2007, 09:00 AM
Well, if we're talking specifically about aircraft suicide bombings/attempts/plots, there are Richard Reid (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Colvin_Reid), Lya Jamal, (http://www.thepanamanews.com/pn/v_10/issue_18/news_03.html) Aminat Nagayeva, Satsia Dzhebirkhanova, (http://edition.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/09/15/russia.planecrash/) and the London airline suicide bomb plotters (http://www.boston.com/news/world/europe/articles/2006/08/21/eleven_uk_bomb_plot_suspects_charged_prosecutor_11 56175201/?rss_id=Boston.com+%2F+News).
And if we're talking about using or plotting to use a plane as the suicide/murder weapon, in addition to the 9/11 hijackers there are Samuel Byck (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Byck), Nikola Kavaja (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikola_Kavaja), Auburn Calloway (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FedEx_Flight_705), Gameel Al-Batouti (http://www.ntsb.gov/Publictn/2002/aab0201.htm), and possibly the hijackers of Air France Flight 8969 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_8969).
Add to that list
Eric Johnson (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17468745/)who aimed his rented plane into his mother in laws house.
Osama bin Laden ssympathizer Charles Bishop (http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/01/06/tampa.crash/index.html)who took aim at a 42 story bank Of America building in Florida
David Burke (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PSA_Flight_1771)who was fired from pacific air and took his revenge by shooting his supervisor and the pilot and steering the plane into the ground.
ElMondoHummus
8th November 2007, 09:06 AM
With the exception of Japanese, nobody else is known for suicide missions.
Duh.... stundie.... whatever.... :confused:
Everyone, that's what's called a "Non Sequitur" (http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#sequitur). Especially when you consider the fact that no one was saying that Muslims or anyone outside of Japanese pilots could not conduct suicide missions.
Come to think of it, the statement is a straw man (http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#straw) as well: The statement was one of incredulity at the obvious leap of logic from "not by Muslims" to "remote control", which is every bit the non sequitur that the above quote it is. It wasn't an attempt to narrow who's capable of suicide missions.
Why this has to be explained, I don't know. I don't have much beyond elementary logic training and even I see the fallacies committed in those statements... anyone with even an undergraduate degree should be able to as well.
Brainster
8th November 2007, 09:16 AM
I think you're giving them way too much credit there.
It's easy to assume that these people are completely irrational because you look at the conspiracy theories head-on. You have to remember that the CT is reverse-engineered, and therefore you have to look at the theories backwards in order to understand why particular bits of "evidence" are cited.
Look at Bofors' comment in #8, which baffled everybody who read it.
With the exception of Japanese, nobody else is known for suicide missions.
In fact, what Bofors said makes perfect sense from the CT mindset. The problem that the 9-11 CT has always had and will always have is that they cannot convince people that the American pilots intentionally crashed their planes. This necessitates large parts of the conspiracy theories:
1. That Flight 11 and Flight 175 did not hit the WTC.
2. That Flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon.
3. That Flight 93 was shot down (or landed in Cleveland).
4. That the cellphone/Airfone calls were faked.
Say that any of those are wrong, and MIHOP is extremely endangered. But you can say that all of them were wrong and still keep MIHOP; you just have to go to the "hijackers are patsies and the planes were remote controlled".
Don't get me wrong; I'm not saying they're skilled chess players by any means. But everything they do will come as a surprise until you start thinking backwards.
Dave Rogers
8th November 2007, 09:48 AM
It's easy to assume that these people are completely irrational because you look at the conspiracy theories head-on. You have to remember that the CT is reverse-engineered, and therefore you have to look at the theories backwards in order to understand why particular bits of "evidence" are cited.
Good point - that seems to me to be a classic property of CTs, and to stem from them being an attempt to formulate an alternative explanation of events that have already happened. Therefore, the 9-11 CTs focus on alternative explanations for the collapse of the Twin Towers without ever examining the question of why that collapse was so necessary to the plan that an extraordinary risk of detection had to be taken to ensure it. Therefore, too, the Pearl Harbor theories focus on why Roosevelt took steps to make sure the attack would take the defenders by surprise, without ever conceding that an attack on Pearl Harbor prior to a declaration of war would be no less a casus belli if the attack was beaten off with heavy losses to the attackers. It seems to be a common feature of many conspiracy theories that, told as a conventional narrative from beginning to end, they are patently nonsensical, and it's because they aren't ever composed that way round.
Dave
negativ
8th November 2007, 10:10 AM
With the exception of Japanese, nobody else is known for suicide missions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_mission#History
fuelair
8th November 2007, 10:17 AM
You can't figure out that 9/11 was an inside job?
Sorry, but it looks like the education system failed you.
Did you even take any physics classes outside of high school?
Obviously those you apparently worship didn't - or language arts.
CptColumbo
8th November 2007, 10:39 AM
bofors-the point you missed is that if I didn't believe that the men suspected of piloting the planes on 9-11 had done so, the next option on my list would not be remote controlled planes. That would be like seeing a light in the sky and thinking its either a helicopter or a spacecraft from another planet.
Jonnyclueless
8th November 2007, 12:33 PM
You can't figure out that 9/11 was an inside job?
Sorry, but it looks like the education system failed you.
Did you even take any physics classes outside of high school?
That was you holding the sign, wasn't it?
dudalb
8th November 2007, 01:41 PM
With the exception of Japanese, nobody else is known for suicide missions.
Duh.... stundie.... whatever.... :confused:
The mind boggles at the total stupidity of that statement.
I guess all of those Suicide Bombers in the Mid East are really NWO agents in disguise....
Hokulele
8th November 2007, 02:07 PM
Ah, now that several other people in this thread have cleared up my confusion as to where bofors was going with this.
That's right, and those people would be Muslim wouldn't they?
Not all of them are. The Middle East is not quite the black and white world many CTists make it out to be.
Bell
8th November 2007, 02:41 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_mission#History
From your link:
A modern example of suicide bombing occurred during the Belgian Revolution, when the Dutch Lieutenant Jan van Speijk detonated his own ship in the harbour of Antwerp to prevent being captured by the Belgians.
That's whom I thought of, when Bofors made that silly claim.
© 2001-2009, James Randi Educational Foundation. All Rights Reserved.
vBulletin® v3.7.5, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.