Indexes
November 21st, 2009
November 20th, 2009
November 19th, 2009
November 18th, 2009
November 17th, 2009
November 16th, 2009
November 14th, 2009
The following stories have received the most reader comments during the last 7 days.
- The country's mess is our fault (165)
- Obama is not a moderate (130)
- Sarah Palin's book hits the shelves: Locals react (70)
- Lodi City Council plans to cap number of taco trucks at 22 (48)
- The haves should help the have-nots (30)
- Public health care is a Christian option (29)
- Tokay in, traveling to unbeaten No. 3 Grant for football playoffs (25)
- Government-run health care is a bad idea (17)
- Young woman fatally shot at Acampo home (17)
- Sierra Adventure store to close after four years in Downtown Lodi (16)
ADVERTISEMENT
Writer says government is responsible for 9/11
Tuesday, March 4, 2008 6:59 AM PST
Previously, I thought that the federal government had advance warning of the 9/11 attacks, and that it took steps to assure that our security and self-defensive systems would not stop the attacks.
Not until 2006 did I realize that our government actually did the attacks.
At the WTC, modified Boeing 767s were used with either remote piloting, or advanced technology guidance systems. There were no human souls on board. Except that they served as a decoy to appeal to the emotions of every American, they did not pertain to the collapse of the WTC towers. It is not possible for burning jet fuel to weaken steel. This fact is admitted by an MIT professor, who contributed to the official government report. His explanation, "quick ignition and intense heat" has no place in professional science. Instead, an FDNY radio transmission requesting two hose teams to extinguish two isolated fire pockets on the 78th floor shows that this fire was almost OUT!
Video evidence of thermite opens a Pandora's box of contradiction. Namely, jet fuel burns 2000 degrees too cold to ignite thermite! The use of thermite would have required secure access to the building, several weeks in advance of the attacks, and according to several YouTube reports, such access did occur. Thermite would have been required to execute a controlled demolition.
The Web site http://www.patriotsquestion911.com provides references of several notable people who oppose the official government report, including senior military personnel ranking as high as major general and general, 9/11 survivors, widows and their families, university professors, pilots and FAA personnel and engineers and architects.
I credit http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/9-11secretservice.html for reporting that Secret Service did not execute any emergency contingency plans to protect the president. The president's itinerary was public information, and if the attacks were a surprise to the Secret Service, they should have responded instantly to secure the president. This is precisely what the White House announced.
Daniel Hutchins
Acampo
Search for Ads 
Today’s Print Ads 
RSS Feeds
Reader Feedback
Gator wrote on Mar 15, 2008 8:36 PM:
it are us!!!! "
Gator wrote on Mar 15, 2008 8:35 PM:
looking back from that far away,not
good!!They think this election is nuts.
But it worries them just the same.They ask why does it take you a year to do when we do it in 3 weeks..With our greed
and lust for every thing we can get our hands on we have put our selves in one big hole...I have seen 6.25 a gallon gas,how far off is that here.How
many folks were so dumb that they didn't
know what "ARM" ment on their loan... "
danielh wrote on Mar 15, 2008 5:34 PM:
The objective is to federalize state jurisdiction, as it existed before the 14th (13th?) amendment. "
danielh wrote on Mar 15, 2008 5:31 PM:
OTH wrote on Mar 15, 2008 5:01 PM:
OTH wrote on Mar 15, 2008 4:54 PM:
I think Obama is trying to run a clean campaign. At this point I would say the gloves are off.
If he conspired with the enemy put it out there. If his wife is a former junkie put it out there. Dirty is as dirty does.
I had hoped for a clean campaign from everybody but true to Clinton style that's no going to happen. "
Gator wrote on Mar 15, 2008 4:51 PM:
I think someone should explain why the Federal Government should
be involved in States business. I must have missed that part of civics
001...It goes back to the sense of entitlement that everyone in this
country seems to have. They look at the person in front of them or
above them and say” what are you going to do for me”??? These
inept, perplexed or overall incompetent people continue to climb
up the ladder of the particulars above them and look for someone
who will grant them those entitlements they believe they have
coming(why they think this way is anyone’s guess)Eventually
these people get to the top, the Federal government and assume
that they are the ones that should give,give,give…Pathetic. How
about we all start taking responsibility for ourselves. Let’s instead
of dumping everything on good old Uncle Sam ,look to our local
and State government to do the job we pay them for. Why not
hold them accountable and stop relying on the cronies in
the federal government to do the States jobs and expecting them
to do it. This is why this country is in the Toilet, and unlike the
Movie Wall Street “GREED is not good!!!
"
Gator wrote on Mar 15, 2008 3:50 PM:
Teddy K was the key behind it and it's just another dumb Program that doesn't
work.Last week Bill Gates was lobying
for more foreign engineers because we
don't turn out enough good ones,how's
that ring your bell,the fact that some
of the very best come from India is a
bloody shame,the best should come from
here no questions asked... "
Gator wrote on Mar 15, 2008 3:37 PM:
party like the EU-C-P?? because they
are.All you hear is Entitlements,time
and time again.They are an empty shell
of times past...They have had control
of both house's and what have they to
show for it,Nada,Zero,Zip not one damn
bill worth spit...By the way Leonard
the repubs are just as bad if not worse.As I stated before we need the
WPA and CCC camps Out of a job want
the Entitlement money then you have to
work for it,no sitting on your butt for
18 mo. "
voter wrote on Mar 15, 2008 11:29 AM:
Leonard wrote on Mar 15, 2008 10:56 AM:
To days Democratic party is just like the Euro commie party..
Which is about as useful as me saying that today's GOP is just like the goose stepping Nazi Party.
Why do you make statements like this? As far as I can see, they do nothing to further discourse. Instead, they simply serve to raise tempers. "
Gator wrote on Mar 15, 2008 7:33 AM:
today coin it.Ask not what you can do
for your country,but what can my country do for me...Gimmie,gimmie... "
real facts wrote on Mar 14, 2008 11:17 PM:
" Hey real fruit if the only thing you can throw at me is my supposed age, you're pathetic. You have no idea how old I am").
no, i have alot more in the "tank" if want some. oh i have an idea, but i know this for sure, your old enough to know better.
***************************************
OTH said: Still too yellow to call the man and stand side by side?").
if i could do it right now, i would in a nylodian minute. since i don't lie (unlike-you).....i-would-WELCOME-that-appointment-with-you-and-me.....if-you-knew-it-were-to-actually-take-place....you-would-run-and-hide "
real facts wrote on Mar 14, 2008 11:07 PM:
here, parsley spoke the truth.
in these blogs nylodian, YOU claimed to be a Christian, and as a "Christian", you should have no problem with that statement, UNLESS your liberal bent tells you that "tolerance" trumps the truths of God.
remember "your" Lord and Master would have said the same thing about islam and allah, seeing how HE was/is God.
rod parsley spoke the truth here, but rod parsley is an affront to Christianity, having turned Christ into a cash-register....THATS-how-one-picks-truth-over-people "
Gator wrote on Mar 14, 2008 9:06 PM:
Birds of a Feather???I don't have any use for one who like the Indians say talk with a forked tounge...To days Democratic party is just like the Euro commie party...
"
sam wrote on Mar 14, 2008 8:59 PM:
OTH, AMEN. "
OTH wrote on Mar 14, 2008 8:49 PM:
If she is the Democratic candidate I have to make a decision on who to vote for. I will not vote for her and McCain is GW in a cheap suit.
I get so tired of having to make a choice between two evils at election time. "
nylodian wrote on Mar 14, 2008 8:07 PM:
Ugh!! I need one of WY's lemon drops. "
nylodian wrote on Mar 14, 2008 7:39 PM:
Remember the X-Files? "Trust No One" "
nylodian wrote on Mar 14, 2008 7:33 PM:
Okay, how about two of them? McCain's spiritual advisor Pastor Rod Parlsey calls Islam a false religion and Allah a demon spirit.
McCain accepted an endorsement from Rev. John Hagee who calls the Catholic Church a "great whore" and false cult system. McCain repudiated the remarks after the Catholic League complained, but not Haycee's endorsement. "
Brian wrote on Mar 14, 2008 6:42 PM:
" Leonard wrote on Mar 14, 2008 1:19 PM:
"I have been to Phoenix and I can say that it is a crime ridden cesspool. Sort of the Stockton of the Southwest. You couldn't pay me to live there."
Yes, I agree, nor would I want to raise children in Phoenix. I have some very good friends that moved there and quickly decided it was a huge mistake and got the heck outta there.
GOOD, We don't need people like you here that only see the negative in this beautiful valley. "
Brian wrote on Mar 14, 2008 6:39 PM:
Now we have Leonard persiting on marginalizing me by making negative comments about Phoenix.
Since no one wants to talk about 911 let's ask Leonard about his hero Obama
and his spiritual adviser Rev. Wright about his hatespeech sermons. I shudder to think how far McCain would be in the primaries had he had such an advisor to go as far as saying the things that Rev. Wright has said. "
voter wrote on Mar 14, 2008 4:55 PM:
OTH wrote on Mar 14, 2008 4:48 PM:
First it was the story about him being a Muslim. Then it was Farakhan. Then it's gone on from there. Would not be at all surptised if the Publicans were behind some of thi.
The party the brought us Bush,Cheney and Rove is not above dirty tricks. "
Lodian wrote on Mar 14, 2008 4:17 PM:
"I have been to Phoenix and I can say that it is a crime ridden cesspool. Sort of the Stockton of the Southwest. You couldn't pay me to live there."
Yes, I agree, nor would I want to raise children in Phoenix. I have some very good friends that moved there and quickly decided it was a huge mistake and got the heck outta there.
"
sam wrote on Mar 14, 2008 2:29 PM:
AWK, I hate the politics of politics. "
sam wrote on Mar 14, 2008 2:25 PM:
" Thank you O' Great Pastafarian. I am done."
RAmen. "
nylodian wrote on Mar 14, 2008 2:05 PM:
nylodian wrote on Mar 14, 2008 2:05 PM:
Leonard wrote on Mar 14, 2008 1:19 PM:
Chuckles, Phoenix doesn't postpone laws to have Fairs. "
Well, whatever SF is doing to get low crime rates like that, Phoenix should start doing as well.
I have been to Phoenix and I can say that it is a crime ridden cesspool. Sort of the Stockton of the Southwest.
You couldn't pay me to live there. "
Brian wrote on Mar 14, 2008 1:13 PM:
" Brian wrote:" Voter, you actually think you can get an accurate answer about how the Fair
is ran given SF's reputation for their lawlessness? "
I just checked national crime statistics--Phoenix has twice as many murders per capita as SF, and SF has fewer rapes than the national average. It would seem that you should be far more concerned with the "lawlessness" of your own city. What is your fascination with gays? Homophobia can be the only reason you continue to rant against SF.
Chuckles, Phoenix doesn't postpone laws to have Fairs. "
OTH wrote on Mar 14, 2008 12:07 PM:
POOF "
sam wrote on Mar 14, 2008 11:47 AM:
sam wrote on Mar 14, 2008 11:45 AM:
In 1995, State Senator Alice Palmer introduced her chosen successor, Barack Obama, to a few of the district’s influential liberals at the home of two well known figures on the local left: William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn.
"
Leonard wrote on Mar 14, 2008 11:39 AM:
It may get you a round of dittos on your favorite talk radio show but it has no relevance to or bearing on the truth. "
Leonard wrote on Mar 14, 2008 10:23 AM:
" I belive it was stated "top advisor
Is that a formal position? Is he paid? Is it a title that Obama gave to him?
Or.... is it merely a made up phrase that the swift boaters have applied to someone with which Obama is acquainted? "
Gator wrote on Mar 14, 2008 9:43 AM:
'When will that B/S stop...He has strong ties to Louis Farrakhan,George
soros.The Country Needs another Truman,
FDR,JFK or Teddy Rooseveldt not this
court jester.I would call it a safe bet
the Clinton Machine will distroy him
before Denver.. "
Gator wrote on Mar 14, 2008 9:29 AM:
I was wrong on the Jail time it was
Kathy Boudin the did the time...
William "Kill all the rich people" Ayers, Professor of Education, University of Illinois at Chicago and Bernardine Dohrn, Director, Children and Family Justice Center Clinical Associate Professor of Law, Northwestern University School of Law, Chicago.
Quack,Quack,Quack... "
Leonard wrote on Mar 14, 2008 9:02 AM:
Gator wrote on Mar 14, 2008 9:00 AM:
The Ayers link, reported on Friday by Bloomberg News, has surfaced in recent days as Mr. Obama tries to add to his lead in the Democratic primary fight. He faces Mrs. Clinton today in a primary in Wisconsin and caucuses in Hawaii, after which they will prepare for critical elections in delegate-rich Ohio and Texas on March 4. "
Leonard wrote on Mar 14, 2008 7:53 AM:
" One more Bloody time,The gentelman in
question is one of Obamas top advisors.
Does this gentleman have a name? "
Gator wrote on Mar 14, 2008 7:49 AM:
question is one of Obamas top advisors.
and he not Obama was a member of the
Weather underground..Like I have said
before "Obama" is an empty shirt with
a lot of nasty folks in and around him.
If it quacks like a duck!!! "
Lodian wrote on Mar 14, 2008 7:45 AM:
"OTH: Save the blogs - don't feed the trolls! lol :)"
That's perfect! Love it!
"
nylodian wrote on Mar 14, 2008 7:40 AM:
nylodian wrote on Mar 14, 2008 7:13 AM:
nylodian wrote on Mar 14, 2008 7:03 AM:
OTH wrote on Mar 13, 2008 8:35 PM:
If you believe anything written on a blog you're on you're a bigger fool than I thought. And that's bad.
I mean you're a yellow bellied coward and a punk but you're not stupid enough to believe everything are you? Well I guess a clown and buffoon would be.
Still too yellow to call the man and stand side by side? Well a liar like you would be. "
real facts wrote on Mar 13, 2008 8:16 PM:
" Gator every time Brian and RF show up on a blog it dies. They are not here to talk about the subject. They are here to furthur their own agendas").
Over The Hill, take a hike. your the queen in here of off topic, and the most hypocritical about it.
brian talks alot about the topics at hand, until he is sidetracked by people like you when you diss him.
me, i have hardly any time to talk about the subject matter, because i spend hours taking out trash like yours, AFTER....you-people-post-it "
real facts wrote on Mar 13, 2008 8:05 PM:
You've got that right! And we've seen a lot of it here on these blogs lately. :)
again nylodian, may peace be with you :)
this is the exact reason i correctly called you a hypocrite. one day your saying "peace be with you" to me, and the next your throwing trash.
i was right about you, despite your bumper sticker attempts at potraying yourself as a person of "peace" "
voter wrote on Mar 13, 2008 7:20 PM:
Gator wrote on Mar 13, 2008 6:37 PM:
Truman, no free lunch.FDR work for
your welfare WPA,CCC...
"
Leonard wrote on Mar 13, 2008 6:18 PM:
Gator wrote on Mar 13, 2008 6:05 PM:
you read... "
sam wrote on Mar 13, 2008 5:43 PM:
"
voter wrote on Mar 13, 2008 4:37 PM:
nylodian wrote on Mar 13, 2008 2:53 PM:
Also: good post (9:16)! "
nylodian wrote on Mar 13, 2008 2:52 PM:
You've got that right! And we've seen a lot of it here on these blogs lately. :) "
Gator wrote on Mar 13, 2008 2:47 PM:
Obama should win...Obama has a lot of
bagage for an empty shirt,Nasty temper,chain smoker,ex-member of the
weather underground as a top adviser who by the way says he still isn't sorry for setting the bombs he did time
for...By the time Denver rolls around
I belive the bloom will be off the rose..Poison Ivy mabey??? "
OTH wrote on Mar 13, 2008 12:13 PM:
OTH wrote on Mar 13, 2008 12:10 PM:
You would think Brian would write a letter to the editor if he's that upset. "
real facts wrote on Mar 13, 2008 12:08 PM:
OTH wrote on Mar 13, 2008 12:06 PM:
real facts wrote on Mar 13, 2008 11:59 AM:
" Why is it that of all the "filth" in the world someone chooses to become fixated on San Francisco? Particularly when they are hundreds of miles away and have to search for the garbage they then regurgitate. Almost the same as someone becoming fixated on lieing when there's 9 other major sins. Maybe the other 9 don't count? ").
i only stated it for what seems like a 1,000 times, isolate another "topic" that we can discuss, and i will tell the truth about that too.....has-NOTHING-to-do-with-homosexuality
i call people out that "claim" to be-"Christians".....who-are-"fixated"-on-lying "
Lodian wrote on Mar 13, 2008 9:35 AM:
"Man that was Quick...Hey, gays are human just like anyone else, most run under the radar and want it that way."BUT"the slime at the FSF are just plain pigs, period..."
There are nasty people in all segments of society. They exist everywhere and undermine the good people they claim to represent.
"
Lodian wrote on Mar 13, 2008 9:30 AM:
"
Lodian wrote on Mar 13, 2008 9:29 AM:
"
Leonard wrote on Mar 13, 2008 9:26 AM:
Gator wrote on Mar 13, 2008 9:24 AM:
"
Gator wrote on Mar 13, 2008 9:16 AM:
Osama/Obama,Osama/Obama,Osama/Obama
Osama/Obaaaaaaammmmmaaaaa!!!!!! "
OTH wrote on Mar 13, 2008 9:16 AM:
Leonard wrote on Mar 13, 2008 9:15 AM:
The man is, for want of a better word, fixated. "
nylodian wrote on Mar 13, 2008 9:15 AM:
Gator wrote on Mar 13, 2008 9:14 AM:
Folsom St Fair...The Folsom fair folks
give gays a bad name,as for Scout if
he was ever at the Fair he was Blind or couldn't see the forest for the trees...http://www.zombietime.com/ Not
for the faint of heart..Miller Beer was
the key sponsor last year but after all
the flack and complaints they wont be
back... "
Lodian wrote on Mar 13, 2008 8:56 AM:
Lodian wrote on Mar 13, 2008 8:39 AM:
"
Leonard wrote on Mar 13, 2008 7:53 AM:
Homophobia can be the only reason you continue to rant against SF.
That or envy. Do you know how hard it is to get a decent loaf of sourdough bread in Phoenix? "
Lodian wrote on Mar 13, 2008 7:49 AM:
"
voter wrote on Mar 13, 2008 6:54 AM:
is ran given SF's reputation for their lawlessness? "
I just checked national crime statistics--Phoenix has twice as many murders per capita as SF, and SF has fewer rapes than the national average. It would seem that you should be far more concerned with the "lawlessness" of your own city. What is your fascination with gays? Homophobia can be the only reason you continue to rant against SF. "
Leonard wrote on Mar 13, 2008 6:28 AM:
Brian, I have to ask. As a citizen of Phoenix, are you employed in the "adult entertainment industry"? "
Leonard wrote on Mar 13, 2008 6:23 AM:
OTH wrote on Mar 12, 2008 11:44 PM:
Pears are fruit dummy and sometimes gays are called fruits and I KNOW you don't want to be called a fruit.
Strange how ones subconcious will play tricks on your speech. Is that called a Freudian slip of the tongue?
BYEYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY "
real facts wrote on Mar 12, 2008 10:32 PM:
it's only going to get worse. it isn't the easiest thing in the world to pick truth over people, but it is rewarding. the peace of God CANNOT be duplicated outside of obeying HIM.
you get an accurate idea of how hard it IS getting, by the sheer numbers in here that swim in that wide river called "whatever - whenever- who cares" "
Brian wrote on Mar 12, 2008 10:07 PM:
just to stay in good graces with my friends or aquaintances. "
Brian wrote on Mar 12, 2008 10:01 PM:
" Brilliant reasoning, Brian. OTH is not homophobic, ergo OTH is indifferent to genocide, war, and terrorism. "
Voter, your reputaion precedes you in your persistance to marginalize me by calling me a homophobe. Please try to come up with something a little more
creative. I'm sorry you don't see the filth that the Fair advocates. Have you seen the Fair's depiction of the last supper? I'm appalled! "
real facts wrote on Mar 12, 2008 9:57 PM:
gee i am so surprised.
finding people that pick integrity/truth over people, is becoming increasingly harder.
true people of integrity are a dying breed, and should be placed on the endangered species list "
Brian wrote on Mar 12, 2008 9:54 PM:
Voter, you actually think you can get an accurate answer about how the Fair
is ran given SF's reputation for their lawlessness? "
voter wrote on Mar 12, 2008 9:48 PM:
Brian wrote on Mar 12, 2008 9:36 PM:
Brian wrote on Mar 12, 2008 9:34 PM:
" Brian since this fair takes place several hundred miles from where you live, what's the problem? The state you live in doesn't have any problems that you could mount your trusty white steed and save the populace from?
I figured I'd get some reply like this eventually. It reveals the lack of concern OTH has for the moral fabric of
America. I'm not sure how many miles I have to be from a given event that merits my concern. I do have friends in the bay area that share my sentiments. "
OTH wrote on Mar 12, 2008 9:23 PM:
Leonard wrote on Mar 12, 2008 8:26 PM:
I do have to say that I am literally ROTFLMAO about the whole gay porn site thing.
"
real facts wrote on Mar 12, 2008 7:37 PM:
will you for once act like a man of character, and tell lodian brian is not me.
eventually you are going to have to show integrity and pick truth over people....here's your chance "
real facts wrote on Mar 12, 2008 7:35 PM:
" Burning man is way out in the middle of Nowhere. Not in a large city. They are quite a bit different").
you are right. the parallel i was making is that a Christian quicky condemns ANY act that is outside Gods standards. it is obviously more heinous to know it's happening in a public place in view of children while the police stand there and do nothing.
even the bay to breakers walk/race makes allowances for public nudity, without being arrested. SF condones AND solicits these behaviors "
real facts wrote on Mar 12, 2008 7:30 PM:
They do claim to be good Christians. Their definition of a good Christian is somewhat different than mine, though").
your being nice, and i can appreciate that about you.
but truth be told, there is a 180 degree difference in them vs you. you actually care about Gods standards. "they" don't give a rip. anytime "they" can't call sin, sin...."they" can't align themselves with biblical authority ....and "they" lie without conscience?......by biblical definition....thier an 'ain't'
it's an ugly truth. but it is the truth nonetheless.
for some of these people, it is NOT about-being--"liberal" "
voter wrote on Mar 12, 2008 7:28 PM:
Laws in San Francisco are not suspended during that fair--I double checked. Your leather clad Peter LaBarbera of the gay bashing site is the only one making that false claim. The other hate websites that mention that falsehood are quoting S&M Pete. Hundreds of videographers and photographers converge on that fair every year--why is it that only your guy says sex is occurring in public? According to SF police and city officials, that event is so well controlled that it has become a model for other street fairs. "
real facts wrote on Mar 12, 2008 7:24 PM:
" real facts is a blog stalking liar. Just ignore him. Maybe the monkey will get him").
lodian is just a little mad that i expose her lying daily. last night i exposed her for lying about having "met me" before.....she couldn't describe what i look like. so actually, SHE is the liar.
ignoring me would be great advice. but ignoring the truth i speak...not good.
many people have tried to "get me", AND FAILED "
Brian wrote on Mar 12, 2008 7:23 PM:
Brian wrote on Mar 12, 2008 7:21 PM:
real facts wrote on Mar 12, 2008 7:17 PM:
lot's of public nudity and sex by heterosexual people.
i condemn that outright, so "homosexuality" has nothing to do with it, while Gods laws and standards have EVERYTHING to do with it.
a Christian picks Gods moral laws over peoples feelings, regardless of who is doing what.
leave the door open to accept this behavior, no telling whats next. even pedophiles sometimes think they are "loving"
"
real facts wrote on Mar 12, 2008 7:09 PM:
gambling: not a sin (for entertainment, and within your means). gambling to get rich and depending on it TO get rich.....sin
strip joints: sin
whorehouses: sin
liberals that make allowances for gay sex in public: hideous
makes no difference if it's 5 minutes, or 24 hours a day
"
Brian wrote on Mar 12, 2008 7:07 PM:
" Brian wrote on Mar 12, 2008 7:21 AM:
even though you
already planted the seed of suspicion
to re-enforce your agenda of discrediting people").
BINGO. you just won the top prize in here with that comment brian.
it is the ONLY thing they have left in their bag-o-tricks.......attempting to discredit others based on purposeful felonious (lying) information.
leonard's the poster boy for that one, but he has alot of company in here.
it's the only thing they have left
Real Facts, You hit the nail right on the head. "
Brian wrote on Mar 12, 2008 7:05 PM:
" Brian just a question. If you are so homophobic why on would earth you go to a gay porno site to begin with? You've never seen hetero couples go at it in public? They may both be disgusting but don't judge everyone by the actions of a dew. "
The Link is not a gay porn site. Get you facts straight. No I've never heard of an organized Fair for Heteros to go at it in public view where laws are postponed so they can have their orgees. Highly improbable Sir. "
real facts wrote on Mar 12, 2008 7:02 PM:
even though you
already planted the seed of suspicion
to re-enforce your agenda of discrediting people").
BINGO. you just won the top prize in here with that comment brian.
it is the ONLY thing they have left in their bag-o-tricks.......attempting to discredit others based on purposeful felonious (lying) information.
leonard's the poster boy for that one, but he has alot of company in here.
it's the only thing they have left "
Brian wrote on Mar 12, 2008 7:01 PM:
" Regarding morality, there seems to be a double standard. Can a conservative explain for me why a gay street fair which raises a quarter million dollars for charity annually and occurs just one day a year is an outrage and an attack on family values, and yet over in Nevada they've got 24 hour drinking, gambling, strip joints and whorehouses and no one seems to bat an eyelash? "
You conveniently left out these other activities are done within the boudries of the law. Marginalizing a Fair that postpones laws is insane. "
Brian wrote on Mar 12, 2008 6:39 PM:
" Brian/realfacts: FYI, not all gay people participate in such events. I would think a grown man, if not prejudiced, would know and admit this fact.
Of course they don't. I never implied that. You seem to be an advocate of these activities that require the postponement of laws. How am I a homophobe that I disagree with the postponement of laws so that gays
can run around naked and fondle eachother all the while city police are
powerless to arrest these people. I hope you aren't advocating other cities do the same. "
OTH wrote on Mar 12, 2008 4:47 PM:
OTH wrote on Mar 12, 2008 4:46 PM:
voter wrote on Mar 12, 2008 4:02 PM:
Lodian wrote on Mar 12, 2008 1:04 PM:
"
Leonard wrote on Mar 12, 2008 12:34 PM:
Its the same thing that racists say about blacks. They all look the same to me "
Lodian wrote on Mar 12, 2008 11:39 AM:
Lodian wrote on Mar 12, 2008 11:36 AM:
"You won't even visit a website because, perhaps you fear you may have to re-examine the friendships you have with gays."
Brian/realfacts: What??? So, you are telling us that we should examine our friendships (friends that are gay) because you found a website, or a town fair, where people are behaving inappropriately in public? What kind of person are you? You seem to have this sick agenda where you just want to condemn anyone that is gay and lump them all in one category. "
OTH wrote on Mar 12, 2008 9:45 AM:
AWAY
YOU COULD TELL BY THE SMELL IT
WASN'T HAY
To my friends and those of you who may be new to this room we have some resident bats. "
Brian wrote on Mar 12, 2008 9:15 AM:
"
Brian wrote on Mar 12, 2008 9:11 AM:
This further re-enforces that Leonard MUST have a crystal ball. "
Brian wrote on Mar 12, 2008 9:05 AM:
Did your term papers not contain bibliographies? :) "
Brian wrote on Mar 12, 2008 9:02 AM:
What do you see in your crystal ball today? :) "
Brian wrote on Mar 12, 2008 8:59 AM:
Leonard and I don't have any patience
with this conspiracy tripe.
Even entertaining the thought makes my skin crawl. Although Leonard an I have our disagreements regarding the Bush Admin. we know nothing of the sort could be committed by them. "
Leonard wrote on Mar 12, 2008 8:58 AM:
" Leonard persists on saying I visit right wing hate sites. If so, then that said, he visits left wing hate sites
I have neither posted links nor cut and pasted from any websites whatsoever.
The arguments that I post on these blogs are wholly my own. I can neither credit nor blame any outside "thought leaders" for their origins. "
Brian wrote on Mar 12, 2008 8:06 AM:
have to know that their are things that make us wonder if this country is really as great as it makes itself out to be. As a conservative I prefer to focus on the good things here in this country. However, it is hard to ignore the damage that liberalism has done to this great country. "
Brian wrote on Mar 12, 2008 7:53 AM:
Brian wrote on Mar 12, 2008 7:50 AM:
Given he never protests things that are a threat to the moral fabric of society, the left wing hate sites he visits must not be concerned with the moral fabric of society. "
Leonard wrote on Mar 12, 2008 7:45 AM:
" Leonard, I'm not at all embarrassed to get my info from CONSERVATIVE SITES
Given some of the sites that you have either cut and pasted from or linked to, you ought to be. "
Leonard wrote on Mar 12, 2008 7:44 AM:
" Leonard wrote: I honestly don't believe that the man is a Nazi.
But no, it makes for good drama that you can further the bloodletting by now saying I am not a nazi even though you
already planted the seed of suspicion
to re-enforce your agenda of discrediting people
If it will make you feel better, I will stop telling people that you are not a Nazi.
:) "
Brian wrote on Mar 12, 2008 7:34 AM:
However, I am embarrassed to live in the proximity of city leaders(SF) that will do anything they please to mock the Constitution and the Bible.
I thought you were an advocate of upholding the words of the Constitution and the Bible. Your reluctance to know how gays really act at the Fair makes me wonder if you're really interested in knowing any kind of truth. "
Brian wrote on Mar 12, 2008 7:25 AM:
This is just another typical liberal reply to something they don't agree with it must then be filled with hate.
Boooooooorrrrrrrring! "
Brian wrote on Mar 12, 2008 7:21 AM:
Leonard, After all the damage you've done by accusing me of posting from nazi websites about the black value system
I thought you were going to let it rest.
But no, it makes for good drama that you can further the bloodletting by now saying I am not a nazi even though you
already planted the seed of suspicion
to re-enforce your agenda of discrediting people.
You won't even visit a website because,
perhaps you fear you may have to re-examine the friendships you have with gays.
"
Leonard wrote on Mar 12, 2008 7:20 AM:
Leonard wrote on Mar 12, 2008 7:19 AM:
IF, however, you would like me to respond to your posts, you will have to compose your arguments in your own words instead of simply relying on right wing hate sites.
I have said all this before and I will probably say it again. "
Brian wrote on Mar 12, 2008 7:11 AM:
Are we now to abide by your rules that we can't post links because you said so?
Really sir, you never had to make bibliographies on your term papers? "
Brian wrote on Mar 12, 2008 7:07 AM:
That Said, then you really aren't interested in the truth given just about every right wing site anyone, and not just me refers to is a hate site in your mind.
You must confess that except for the link I provided everything else is in my words.
It's not just on this site where I found out SF postpones laws so the Fair can happen. I'm surprised you would support their agenda.
"
Leonard wrote on Mar 12, 2008 7:00 AM:
Leonard wrote on Mar 11, 2008 8:41 AM:
This is not the first time this sort of thing has happened with Brian. I honestly don't believe that the man is a Nazi
"
Leonard wrote on Mar 12, 2008 6:59 AM:
I don't appreciate you suggesting that just because I posted a link thaty describes the goings on at the Fair that i am now a nazi.
Again, I cannot emphasize enough the fact that you need to READ my posts before you respond to them. Far from calling you a Nazi, my post specifically stated that I DID NOT think you were a Nazi. "
Leonard wrote on Mar 12, 2008 6:55 AM:
" Leonard, Unless you can prove that these pictures on this site aren't real I suggest
you be careful what you are condoning.
Brian, if I have said it once, I have said it a million times. I will not follow links to right wing hate sites.
Its never going to happen.
If you have an argument to make, put it in your own words. If you either can't or won't take that simple step, stop wasting our time. "
Lodian wrote on Mar 12, 2008 1:28 AM:
Lodian wrote on Mar 12, 2008 1:26 AM:
real facts wrote on Mar 11, 2008 11:49 PM:
OTH wrote on Mar 11, 2008 10:55 PM:
real facts wrote on Mar 11, 2008 10:33 PM:
Brian/you should be ashamed of yourself for such ugly non-Christian behavior. You post nasty lies, cuss people out and even hide behind God (constantly) as your excuse for trying to damage others and their relationship with God. There’s not much worse that doing that for your life’s work").
were you being sincere with brian here? did you really mean it?
because you just described YOU !!!
you lie daily. you cussed me out before, and tried to undermine my relationship with WY multiple times.
YOUR the heinous evil one in here "
real facts wrote on Mar 11, 2008 10:30 PM:
I have never cussed anyone out or used foul language here, ever. For you to equate a murmured cuss word when playing golf to calling someone vile names in personal attacks is deplorable and shows your lack of integrity, respect, character and class, again").
thats a lie (gee i am surprised at this).
you said i was an a$$hole in the other blogs. you know lodian, you should find something else to do with your time...you can't even keep your words (lies) straight.
i call people what they are....you lie without conscience DAILY....thats-deplorable "
real facts wrote on Mar 11, 2008 10:26 PM:
i have some very bad news billy, concerning your "choice".....whether it is brian OR me, is irrelevant. long after we are gone, homosexuality (or ANY sin) will STILL be a sin opposed by God.
so you can turn the "facts" around about that all you want. the FACT is, that it always was a sin, and always will be a sin.
God hates sin, and so do brian and i. we love people though "
real facts wrote on Mar 11, 2008 10:21 PM:
"real facts 11:41 AM: Of course you are defending Brian, and his vicious foul mouthed attacks, as you "are" Brian").
i am now actually EXPECTING you to lie on every post.
(ask leonard if i am brian, liar).
even WY and OTH know i am not brian. you just want me to "be" brian, so you will have company in the sewer you swin in. no thanks.
my position in life isn't weak, and i don't need multiple personalities in order to bail myself out. thats YOUR disease
where is "real_facts" BTW ??? "
ICU wrote on Mar 11, 2008 9:10 PM:
OTH wrote on Mar 11, 2008 8:55 PM:
ICU wrote on Mar 11, 2008 8:37 PM:
ICU wrote on Mar 11, 2008 8:36 PM:
ICU wrote on Mar 11, 2008 8:34 PM:
OTH wrote on Mar 11, 2008 6:21 PM:
Look at it this way Brian, people get screwed in San Francisco and people get screwed by the Patriot Act. One's voluntary and the other you never know what has hit you. Fair trade "
Lodian wrote on Mar 11, 2008 4:10 PM:
Brian wrote on Mar 11, 2008 4:05 PM:
nylodian wrote on Mar 11, 2008 3:25 PM:
I witnessed such a fair but based on my friendships with several gay men and women, I sincerely think the majority of the gay community would condemn such public acts since they undermine the goal to be treated with tolerance and respect. "
voter wrote on Mar 11, 2008 3:21 PM:
Peter LaBarbera, who runs that site, worked for Concerned Women for America, a group on the watch list of several civil rights organizations. He attends gay events in S&M leathers "for research", and coworkers claim he collects gay porn. He is considered the largest purveyor of gay porn to Christians (via his website). Those photos could have come from anywhere--he has attended scores of events and private parties. Think maybe he has a wide stance?
"
Lodian wrote on Mar 11, 2008 3:17 PM:
Brian is posting links to pornographic photos!
Why would anyone post a link to a website like that? I'm surprised that the LNS would allow the posting of links to porn photos.
"
Brian wrote on Mar 11, 2008 2:24 PM:
you be careful what you are condoning.
I don't appreciate you suggesting that just because I posted a link thaty describes the goings on at the Fair that i am now a nazi. perhaps you should read some of girard74's posts
agreeing with my sentiments about the Fair before you attack me. "
Lodian wrote on Mar 11, 2008 2:06 PM:
Billy Rubin wrote on Mar 11, 2008 12:47 PM:
Brevity is the soul of wit. LOL
It's too bad we have to wade through the cesspool of Brian Facts hate-spew to get to see WY's stuff. The dog/monkey side story long ago overtook the thread topic as the real attraction.
WY, you continually crack me up. "
Lodian wrote on Mar 11, 2008 12:36 PM:
real facts 11:41 AM: Of course you are defending Brian, and his vicious foul mouthed attacks, as you "are" Brian. I have never cussed anyone out or used foul language here, ever. For you to equate a murmured cuss word when playing golf to calling someone vile names in personal attacks is deplorable and shows your lack of integrity, respect, character and class, again.
Brian/you should be ashamed of yourself for such ugly non-Christian behavior. You post nasty lies, cuss people out and even hide behind God (constantly) as your excuse for trying to damage others and their relationship with God. There’s not much worse that doing that for your life’s work. The work of the devil? I think so. It's what you do when you have no argument, can't defend your silly babble, and feel helpless. You have pushed everyone here away from you. If there were new Christians here they have surely run off, and fast, as you are no fine example of a Christian.
Go ahead and defend the dirty-mouthed posts that you/Brian enjoy so much. It's just like you, and expected by all that post here, that you will post some off the wall garbage about anything and everything in your little brain. You are a sad man with a lost soul and nothing to offer others in any way shape or form here. As Gerard74 has suggested to you, find a pastor or spiritual advisor for guidance, as you are lost.
"
real facts wrote on Mar 11, 2008 11:41 AM:
" Brian's posts should embarrass him, period").
look who is talking.
i will pick a thousand "brians" over one of you any day.
brian shouldn't have let his anger go that far, but who doesn't some time. shoot i cuss sometimes when i play golf (lol). but lying day in and day out, now THATS deplorable behavior.
your a hypocrite to even say anything about brians slip up "
Lodian wrote on Mar 11, 2008 9:18 AM:
Leonard wrote on Mar 11, 2008 8:41 AM:
" Nothing like a little gay bashing propaganda to start the week off right. Brian, the website you reference is a hate forum against homosexuls
This is not the first time this sort of thing has happened with Brian. I honestly don't believe that the man is a Nazi but his inability to critically analyze the websites he frequents has resulted in some pretty embarrassing posts on more than one occasion.
"
real facts wrote on Mar 10, 2008 8:20 PM:
everytime i back you into a corner philisophically, you cry foul and run in the opposite direction.
then you make the comments over and over ....."i am not going to respond to you again", and then when the "heat" that caused you to run in the first place dies down, out of the shadows you re-appear.
i guess you don't have a problem making yourself look foolish....you don't even need my help.
your honorary "degree" from wuss university came in handy, when you "excused" yourself away from the debate that YOU started.
you complain i don't "debate"....then-when-i-do,--you-cry-"foul"-and-run-away "
WY wrote on Mar 10, 2008 7:31 PM:
WY wrote on Mar 10, 2008 7:28 PM:
"
WY wrote on Mar 10, 2008 7:24 PM:
WY wrote on Mar 10, 2008 7:21 PM:
WY wrote on Mar 10, 2008 7:19 PM:
Robb wrote on Mar 10, 2008 7:09 PM:
I never know, they seem to come out of "nowhere".. "
scout wrote on Mar 10, 2008 6:29 PM:
icu wrote on Mar 10, 2008 4:55 PM:
Lodian wrote on Mar 10, 2008 4:54 PM:
icu wrote on Mar 10, 2008 4:54 PM:
He was responding sarcastically to one of the religion blogs. Best line ever.
He sarcasm is back with more monkeys. "
WY wrote on Mar 10, 2008 4:29 PM:
OTH wrote on Mar 10, 2008 4:21 PM:
Can we run you for mayor? "
voter wrote on Mar 10, 2008 4:01 PM:
voter wrote on Mar 10, 2008 3:54 PM:
Robb wrote on Mar 10, 2008 1:53 PM:
Yea okay..... again with the monkeys... "
girard74 wrote on Mar 10, 2008 12:34 PM:
I normally do NOT 'carry over' from one subject to another; yet in this case it would be irresponsible for me not to.
You will continue with your aberrant behavior; however, I will not participate at any level that will further your behavior. "
real facts wrote on Mar 10, 2008 12:09 PM:
More importantly is the mandate from God that it is not up to me to judge anyone in this regard").
your last statement about "judging" is biblically way off. the apostle paul was murdered FOR judging others....God-demands-that-we-judge-sin
the answer is it's obviously a "chosen" behavior. if God condemns homosexual sex, he wouldn't turn around and create someone...TO..sin,..and-FOR-sin....thats-rediculous "
real facts wrote on Mar 10, 2008 12:02 PM:
It's that simple for you, huh?
We are to 'love' our fellow man - regardless of who or what they are. We are ALL sinners, even you RF.
God is the one who does the judging and the condemning").
it sure is "just that simple". for instance, about homosexuality, God condemns homosexual sex of any kind, so i don't need to "wonder" what to do/or think about it. the conclusion is then simple.
we are to love people, but we are NOT to allow sin to prevail.
we as Christians cannot condemn, but we ARE to-judge-sin-in-order-for-sin-to-NOT-prevail-in-the-world---Christians-are-"supposed"-to-be-standard-bearers "
girard74 wrote on Mar 10, 2008 9:54 AM:
Sodom and/or Gomorrah are more appropriate names. Unfortunately, San Francisco’s permissive citizenry may soon have to suffer the results of its own debauchery. "
Brian wrote on Mar 10, 2008 9:17 AM:
the precedent SF is setting by allowing
such acts in public.
Thank you Girard74! "
Brian wrote on Mar 10, 2008 9:14 AM:
" Brian wrote, 'Certain laws were postponed in order for the Fair to happen. How about that.'
Any city that suspends any law in order to permit anyone to commit crimes with impunity should be under investigation by state and/or federal authorities.
San Francisco is notorious for their lawlessness as well as for their openly defiant stance against laws that they simply do not 'like.' The penalties for convictions against citizens, police and city officials should be swift and severe - zero tolerance.
HEAR HEAR "
girard74 wrote on Mar 10, 2008 9:01 AM:
Any city that suspends any law in order to permit anyone to commit crimes with impunity should be under investigation by state and/or federal authorities.
San Francisco is notorious for their lawlessness as well as for their openly defiant stance against laws that they simply do not 'like.' The penalties for convictions against citizens, police and city officials should be swift and severe - zero tolerance.
It's difficult for me to adequately describe my loathing for such anarchy – it’s not just un-American, it’s anti-American. "
Brian wrote on Mar 10, 2008 8:32 AM:
And she's third in line to the presidency. "
Brian wrote on Mar 10, 2008 8:29 AM:
Scout, Sure, there's nothing going on of questionable nature right out in public at the Fair. Give Me A Break! "
Brian wrote on Mar 10, 2008 8:16 AM:
Not in SF. Certain laws were postponed in order for the Fair to happen. How about that. "
Brian wrote on Mar 10, 2008 8:11 AM:
" Brian, are you condemning oral sex? How sad for you. "
Sam, Not quite.
Are YOU not condemning oral sex in public?, as I stated about the goings on at the Folsom Street Fair.
Scout, you are lying. I have links and pictures of the FSF (no I did not take them) showing people in plain sight giving oral sex and there are children nearby. Good ole family values. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 10, 2008 3:51 AM:
He judged me on my consternation about harshly criticizing gay people.
Where I am lacking in my understanding is where many people disagree as well.
Is homosexuality 'chosen' or is it 'natural.' By 'natural' I mean is it something that is inherently built-in? Unable to answer that question to a moral certainty precludes me from being able to honestly judge the behavior.
More importantly is the mandate from God that it is not up to me to judge anyone in this regard. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 10, 2008 12:16 AM:
It's that simple for you, huh? You're missing one very important fact about God and Christianity.
We are to 'love' our fellow man - regardless of who or what they are. We are ALL sinners, even you RF.
God is the one who does the judging and the condemning. He didn't leave the task for you to work on down here. You're working way beyond your paygrade, fella.
Hating 'sin' and hating 'people' (as you apparently do), are two separate things. Grow up. "
real facts wrote on Mar 9, 2008 11:52 PM:
But I don't condemn peoples' lifestyles. I've lived long enough to understand that I am not here to judge things that I do not fully understand. I know that puts me at odds with my belief system. But that's my problem").
that SHOULD be an easy fix for a person who really does follow Jesus Christ. what God calls sin, "WE" call sin. end of story.
there is nothing to "fully understand" beyond what God says about it.
unless of course you don't care, and PREFER to make up your own "standards" about it "
Lodian wrote on Mar 9, 2008 9:50 PM:
WY wrote on Mar 9, 2008 9:18 PM:
How did you all start talking about this...? "
WY wrote on Mar 9, 2008 9:17 PM:
An I'm all in with voter's 7:57 post, DittO :D
My friend told me about a friend that knew this guy who knew this girl that said her braces got all hung up and the guy yelped and he stopped letting her forever.
So, It could happen... not liking it and all. "
sam wrote on Mar 9, 2008 9:08 PM:
sam wrote on Mar 9, 2008 8:09 PM:
scout wrote on Mar 9, 2008 8:09 PM:
voter wrote on Mar 9, 2008 7:57 PM:
sam wrote on Mar 9, 2008 7:54 PM:
scout wrote on Mar 9, 2008 7:51 PM:
voter wrote on Mar 9, 2008 7:42 PM:
sam wrote on Mar 9, 2008 7:38 PM:
girard74 wrote on Mar 9, 2008 7:37 PM:
Oooh, you ARE a little scamp, aren't you?!? "
sam wrote on Mar 9, 2008 7:35 PM:
girard74 wrote on Mar 9, 2008 7:28 PM:
Okay, I'm not stating this to appear superior to you or anyone else; it is simply something that a lot of folks don't understand.
The correct statement is, Hear, Hear! As you probably do know it was used during town and governmental meetings back in the 1700s. It means to listen (to hear) what someone is saying.
Again, no offense intended. "
voter wrote on Mar 9, 2008 7:28 PM:
girard74 wrote on Mar 9, 2008 7:25 PM:
I don't agree with Pelosi - most of the time her statements border on the incomprehensible to the incredible. She is a source of much laughter in my home.
But I don't condemn peoples' lifestyles. I've lived long enough to understand that I am not here to judge things that I do not fully understand. I know that puts me at odds with my belief system. But that's my problem. "
voter wrote on Mar 9, 2008 7:22 PM:
"
sam wrote on Mar 9, 2008 7:19 PM:
Brian wrote on Mar 9, 2008 7:16 PM:
HERE HERE!
We can always count on Nancy Pelosi
to be consistently liberal. Within her district is the Folsom Street Fair. Yep,gay men and women walking around butt naked
and giving eachother oral sex. Yep, good ole family values there. Your tax dollars at work. "
voter wrote on Mar 9, 2008 7:13 PM:
girard74 wrote on Mar 9, 2008 6:42 PM:
While they were all campaigning, the democrats guaranteed and promised sweeping changes if they took control of the congress. Now we have an even more of a 'do nothing' congress; and the blame goes to - the republicans!! Of course!!!
Yet, anyone with a half a brain needs only to review what has (or actually has not) transpired and can easily recognize democrat-controlled incompetence.
A democrat back in the White House will just be more of the same.
Re-Elect Jimmy Carter!!! He'll change things!!!! "
girard74 wrote on Mar 9, 2008 6:39 PM:
No, what he will most likely do is ignore all of the failure that will be certain to follow and continue to blame it on Bush II, Bush I, Reagan, Ford, Nixon and Eisenhower; maybe even Lincoln as well.
'IF' a democrat wins, if nothing else it will be entertaining!! "
sam wrote on Mar 9, 2008 6:21 PM:
OTH wrote on Mar 9, 2008 5:36 PM:
sam wrote on Mar 9, 2008 2:41 PM:
It is fun to share the humor.
"
sam wrote on Mar 9, 2008 2:39 PM:
I do not agree with everything he says, but some of these shows are hilarious to watch. You have to admit with this being the longest presidential campaign ever, it fun to laugh at stuff now and then. "
voter wrote on Mar 9, 2008 2:38 PM:
sam wrote on Mar 9, 2008 2:35 PM:
He did say McCain was right in saying we could be in Iraq for awhile. They (he and his board of commentators) said that we cannot just pull out. It would be impossible. "
sam wrote on Mar 9, 2008 2:33 PM:
Brian wrote on Mar 9, 2008 2:23 PM:
Lodian wrote on Mar 9, 2008 11:58 AM:
Lodian wrote on Mar 9, 2008 11:56 AM:
Lodian wrote on Mar 9, 2008 11:56 AM:
sam wrote on Mar 9, 2008 11:29 AM:
It is obvious that Bush had nothing to do with it because 1) it worked and 2) it took planning. "
Brian wrote on Mar 9, 2008 9:44 AM:
One could gather from this that the LNS endorses his theories. FOR SHAME.
These theories are tripe, tripe, and more tripe! "
real facts wrote on Mar 8, 2008 11:35 PM:
it matches your other "claims" you have been making since i have watched you in action in here for over one year.
say one thing - do another
same day - different blog
This blog is not displayed because you have added the blogger "leonard" to your SNORE list (laughing)
"
Leonard wrote on Mar 8, 2008 5:39 PM:
That being the case....
This blog is not displayed because you have added the blogger "Real Facts" to your Ignore list.
Back to where you belong.... "
real facts wrote on Mar 8, 2008 5:25 PM:
i never acted as one.
i did however act like a true believer "should" act, and that is when he see's sin, especially sin from a "professed" believer, he calls it into accountability.
doing what i am called to do girard. protecting Gods authority and standards, so that people like you can't sell the idea that you can lie/sin without conscience, and still call yourself a follower of Jesus Christ.
keeping a promise i made to this board over-one-year-ago "
real facts wrote on Mar 8, 2008 5:20 PM:
your not a "victim" of anything but your own undoing. YOU came at me, i didn't address you. i only raised the level of awareness of your lack of integrity, when you started flushing it.
you trash talk me every day, and expect me not to give you what you deserve? maybe in your...ego-driven-world.
next time, don't man up to somebody unless your willing to get what you-have-coming-to-you " "
real facts wrote on Mar 8, 2008 5:18 PM:
I would say that your currents status is "probational").
which is leonard code for ;
i will continue to hit and run from the shadows of life, and pretend to myself that i am the model of integrity.
you and girard need to get an apt together "
real facts wrote on Mar 8, 2008 5:12 PM:
" real facts wrote on Mar 8, 2008 1:25 PM: you forgot that you said you had me "blocked"
No, I took you off of my blocked list because I heard from other posters that you had stopped whining like a little baby and calling everyone a liar").
i am not like you leonard, i actually DO tell the truth. which means that if someone does lie, and does it on a continual basis, that i am going to call you what you are.
and guess what, your lying about blocking me.......ever :)......it's-who-you-are "
danielh wrote on Mar 8, 2008 3:01 PM:
Gator wrote on Mar 8, 2008 1:59 PM:
" I really wonder if danielH is that much
of a loon or he is a very slick Troll
From what I see the Trolls have won as
far off post as this is now and that
sucks!!! "
girard74 wrote on Mar 8, 2008 1:58 PM:
If one soul is diverted from salvation because of your vile discourse, then may God have mercy upon you. But that is YOUR problem, not mine. Leave me alone. "
Leonard wrote on Mar 8, 2008 1:34 PM:
you forgot that you said you had me "blocked"
No, I took you off of my blocked list because I heard from other posters that you had stopped whining like a little baby and calling everyone a liar. It appears that I may have been misinformed.
I would say that your currents status is "probational". "
real facts wrote on Mar 8, 2008 1:32 PM:
" Like a bad nickel..... ").
nope. more like a roll of quarters, rolling all over your "conterfit money".
leonard, you do know where "counterfitters" end up, right?
you should probably slither back under your phony claim, that you "can't" read my posts. "
real facts wrote on Mar 8, 2008 1:25 PM:
" real facts wrote on Mar 6, 2008 11:44 PM: to think that a "pudgy short 16year old"
You forgot the acne").
you forgot that you said you had me "blocked". it's just like you. you were always a hit and run artist anyway. now you get to play your little chicken game from the shadows, all the while maintaining you have me "blocked".
now i can make fun of your lack of bravado, and you can't do squat about it.
according to girard, i am that "kid" that took you on as-well....and-you-ran-and-hid "
sam wrote on Mar 8, 2008 12:39 PM:
OTH wrote on Mar 8, 2008 12:22 PM:
sam wrote on Mar 8, 2008 9:35 AM:
nylodian wrote on Mar 8, 2008 9:17 AM:
You guys are such a kick - careful, the fun police will be coming after you, LOL!!! "
WY wrote on Mar 8, 2008 7:42 AM:
WY wrote on Mar 8, 2008 7:41 AM:
sam wrote on Mar 7, 2008 10:21 PM:
WY wrote on Mar 7, 2008 9:27 PM:
WY wrote on Mar 7, 2008 9:26 PM:
sam wrote on Mar 7, 2008 8:29 PM:
WY wrote on Mar 7, 2008 8:22 PM:
WY wrote on Mar 7, 2008 8:21 PM:
OTH wrote on Mar 7, 2008 8:12 PM:
sam wrote on Mar 7, 2008 8:10 PM:
I am SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ready. "
WY wrote on Mar 7, 2008 6:43 PM:
WY wrote on Mar 7, 2008 6:42 PM:
WY wrote on Mar 7, 2008 6:40 PM:
WY wrote on Mar 7, 2008 6:38 PM:
sam wrote on Mar 7, 2008 6:00 PM:
sam wrote on Mar 7, 2008 5:59 PM:
Count me in on your birthday bash... lets make it last a few days. I will bring the lemon drops. AND a designated driver.
I swear I saw a monkey in the vineyard this morning. You missing one? "
WY wrote on Mar 7, 2008 5:53 PM:
WY wrote on Mar 7, 2008 5:52 PM:
WY wrote on Mar 7, 2008 5:51 PM:
And remember...
What you can't remember, didn't happen and qualifies for a do over! "
WY wrote on Mar 7, 2008 5:40 PM:
mee mememeeee~
Happy birthday to you!
you live in a zoo! cha cha cha
you smell like a REMOTE STEALING MONKEY...
and you act like one too. cha cha cha!
just kidding! I can't smell anything I have blossom feaver, sniffer's broke! "
nylodian wrote on Mar 7, 2008 4:49 PM:
girard: re: "how does it feel to turn 21?" YOU ARE MY HERO!!! :D
sam: Happy Belated to you!
Boomer: I love you too (I know Boomer personally for those who may be wondering)
OTH: thank you for the song, and it sometimes feels like I live in a zoo. ;)
Lodian: Thanks, girlfriend!
"
Lodian wrote on Mar 7, 2008 4:00 PM:
here we go...
Happy Birthday, SAM! "
Lodian wrote on Mar 7, 2008 3:59 PM:
nylodian: Happy birthday girlfriend! "
OTH wrote on Mar 7, 2008 3:20 PM:
OTH wrote on Mar 7, 2008 3:07 PM:
Happy Birthday to you
You belong in a zoo
Happy Birthday
Happy Birthday
Happy Birthday to You
My mind is becoming mush. Can you tell? Just kidding about the zoo.:) "
OTH wrote on Mar 7, 2008 3:02 PM:
sam wrote on Mar 7, 2008 3:01 PM:
girard74 wrote on Mar 7, 2008 1:22 PM:
Awww, you don't need to 'take' it. Here's one just for you - Happy (belated) Birthday, Sam!!!! "
boomer wrote on Mar 7, 2008 1:05 PM:
sam wrote on Mar 7, 2008 1:05 PM:
girard74 wrote on Mar 7, 2008 1:01 PM:
Sorry, I meant, NYLodian, Happy Birthday!!! How does it feel to finally be 21?!?
Please forgive me!!! "
girard74 wrote on Mar 7, 2008 1:00 PM:
girard74 wrote on Mar 7, 2008 12:56 PM:
Whoa - did you see that YouTube video as well?!?! Zapruder had it all wrong; if he had moved his 8mm just a bit to the left, he would have noticed PeeWee's bicyle that had been, until that very day, carefully hidden in the 'basement' of the Alamo in San Antonio.
That would have solved the mystery right then and there! "
nylodian wrote on Mar 7, 2008 12:51 PM:
Lodian wrote on Mar 7, 2008 10:37 AM:
I know, as you are cReEpY that way. LOL
"
LodiJoe wrote on Mar 7, 2008 10:13 AM:
sam wrote on Mar 7, 2008 9:33 AM:
... but after reading OTH's concise comments on committing a mentally ill person, I will wait for her expert opinion on the rules.
FYI, Happy Friday to ya. "
Leonard wrote on Mar 7, 2008 8:01 AM:
Gator wrote on Mar 7, 2008 7:42 AM:
of a loon or he is a very slick Troll.
And we know you don't fee the Trolls,if
it's the later he has been well fed and
is sitting back with a big grin?? Just
a thought... "
Leonard wrote on Mar 7, 2008 7:16 AM:
to think that a "pudgy short 16year old"
You forgot the acne. "
Leonard wrote on Mar 7, 2008 7:14 AM:
nylodian wrote on Mar 7, 2008 7:03 AM:
"
real facts wrote on Mar 6, 2008 11:59 PM:
i told you guys if you didn't mention me, or mess with Gods authority/word, you wouldn't even notice i was around.
as you can see, girard couldn't help me revealing his false sense of bravdo once again, so i had to demonstrate what a "pudgy 16year old" did to his ego
someday you people will get it....and i won't be in here anymore.
until then.....i am "watching" "
Lodian wrote on Mar 6, 2008 11:51 PM:
real facts wrote on Mar 6, 2008 11:44 PM:
if thats true, that makes you look more like a loser in the integrity war then previously displayed.
to think that a "pudgy short 16year old" made you look silly, that has to be preeeeeeety embarrasing for you considering the size of your inflated ego.
nope. you were willing to flush your integrity....all-by-your-self "
SportsGuru wrote on Mar 6, 2008 9:46 PM:
DANIEL ... PLEASE PUT YOUR HANDS BEHIND YOUR HEAD ... AND STEP AWAY FROM THE CRACK PIPE! "
Lodian wrote on Mar 6, 2008 9:35 PM:
"
OTH wrote on Mar 6, 2008 8:49 PM:
sam wrote on Mar 6, 2008 8:12 PM:
Cogito wrote on Mar 6, 2008 8:00 PM:
WY wrote on Mar 6, 2008 7:54 PM:
WY wrote on Mar 6, 2008 7:53 PM:
Cogito wrote on Mar 6, 2008 7:53 PM:
WY wrote on Mar 6, 2008 7:44 PM:
WY wrote on Mar 6, 2008 7:38 PM:
Robb wrote on Mar 6, 2008 5:55 PM:
and, monkeys fly out of my butt.. "
sam wrote on Mar 6, 2008 3:41 PM:
girard74 wrote on Mar 6, 2008 11:30 AM:
At this point in the game, although I've been baited by a number of other silly bloggers and have vowed to refrain from engaging with them, from now on, that ends. I'll 'debate' with anyone. But not with these loathsome idiots. "
Leonard wrote on Mar 6, 2008 10:30 AM:
What does it take to get a seriously ill person institutionalized in California? "
deiter wrote on Mar 6, 2008 10:24 AM:
Lodian wrote on Mar 6, 2008 9:15 AM:
"Lodian: Great post at 10:19! :)"
Thanks! :-) "
Lodian wrote on Mar 6, 2008 9:14 AM:
"
Lodian wrote on Mar 6, 2008 9:13 AM:
"
Gator wrote on Mar 6, 2008 8:16 AM:
at night when the lights are out and the Demons come??? "
Gator wrote on Mar 6, 2008 8:12 AM:
the Truthers are an unhappy lot and live
in a world of their own some where tween
Alice and the white rabbit and Timothy
leary.Here is a link for you read it and
sit a think about all it has to say
http://vincentdunn.com/wtc.html
Why the World Trade Center Buildings Collapsed
A Fire Chief ’s Assessment "
sam wrote on Mar 6, 2008 7:59 AM:
sam wrote on Mar 6, 2008 7:58 AM:
Leonard wrote on Mar 6, 2008 7:56 AM:
I just haven't commented because nothing you have said has merited anything more than a general expression of revulsion and disgust. "
WY wrote on Mar 6, 2008 7:50 AM:
I'm with you on that conspiracy theory. "
WY wrote on Mar 6, 2008 7:47 AM:
WHOOOSH!
"
nylodian wrote on Mar 6, 2008 7:45 AM:
WY wrote on Mar 6, 2008 7:43 AM:
WY wrote on Mar 6, 2008 7:42 AM:
WY wrote on Mar 6, 2008 7:41 AM:
I got a visual of you getting on the FLYING BOBS ,on accident, at the frestival when you really wanted the teacups! lol :D I'm so glad you're here and willing to get on even if you know you might get dizzy and puke! By gosh you even put your arms up and whoot a bit! lol
You make me laugh! "
nylodian wrote on Mar 6, 2008 7:39 AM:
WY wrote on Mar 6, 2008 7:36 AM:
girard74 wrote on Mar 5, 2008 11:12 PM:
Just thought I'd slip in a thought here. 'Uniformed personnel' are not considered a part of the government, as commonly believed. The 'government' usually refers to the elected officials and the bureaucratic appointees and employees. 'Uniformed personnel' are under the command of the president and then through the chain of command. They are subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which differs somewhat significantly from what most of us understand in civilian criminal courts. Just thought you should know. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 5, 2008 11:07 PM:
I respect your decision. Unfortunately, I got sucked into another fiasco on this very blog today with danielH. It wasn't pretty. But I'm behaving myself now. See you in the funny papers! "
danielh wrote on Mar 5, 2008 11:01 PM:
If you prefer to trust our govt, well, you have uniformed personnel in the first link. "
danielh wrote on Mar 5, 2008 10:59 PM:
Your position is based, instead, upon a 9/11 commission report, from which Kissinger was forced to resign, and for which noone in the government is answering any questions about the report.
I have offered you written statements from qualified people, in the first link above, but you prefer to belitle the reliability of YouTube instead.
"
sam wrote on Mar 5, 2008 10:35 PM:
sam wrote on Mar 5, 2008 10:33 PM:
sam wrote on Mar 5, 2008 10:32 PM:
I am really serious about ending this blog nonsense. Call me crazy (silently please) but I have to give it a try. "
sam wrote on Mar 5, 2008 10:28 PM:
Great words! "
girard74 wrote on Mar 5, 2008 10:21 PM:
Lodian wrote on Mar 5, 2008 10:19 PM:
danielh wrote on Mar 5, 2008 8:46 PM:
"Lodian: If you don't like YouTube, then follow the links in the letter above. You might learn something."
Did you assume that I don't like Youtube? Not true. I enjoy Youtube. I was saying that, with the nature of Youtube, one could post just about anything. Videos posted are doctored, altered, completely made up and of course true (even raw) video as well. Creative (talented) filmmakers post their works on Youtube all the time. A wise person would get their information from a variety of sources. Youtube can be very entertaining.
"
girard74 wrote on Mar 5, 2008 10:19 PM:
Sorry, I just couldn't help myself. "
WY wrote on Mar 5, 2008 10:05 PM:
girard74 wrote on Mar 5, 2008 9:56 PM:
I would take his word for this, Lodian. Because if you rely only upon the information in Hutchins' letter, you really won't learn much that is factual or true. "
danielh wrote on Mar 5, 2008 8:46 PM:
Lodian wrote on Mar 5, 2008 7:39 PM:
"Isn't it amazing how folks believe everything they read or see on the Internet? While there is an incredible wealth of information available to us now as a result of this wonderful invention, it now requires us to be much more discerning with regard to the validity and veracity of the information we access. Sure, YouTube has some excellent information; but there's a lot of nonsense there as well."
girard74: Yes, and many an independent film maker can find an audience on this free site. Not all is what it seems.
"
danielh wrote on Mar 5, 2008 7:27 PM:
It doesn't matter. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 5, 2008 7:07 PM:
girard74 wrote on Mar 5, 2008 7:06 PM:
EVERYTHING was wrong with your letter. The LNS didn't 'publish' that letter - they merely printed it. There's a big difference.
You somehow think that because you get a letter printed in a little podunk paper that you are somehow 'legitimate.'
Your legitimacy is feigned - you're a little boy with a huge ego. And you need to grow up. "
danielh wrote on Mar 5, 2008 6:56 PM:
We're even.
You expressed your opinion about my letter, but you couldn't find anything specific that was wrong. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 5, 2008 6:52 PM:
For your edification, here is the definition:
buf·foon(bə-fōōn') n.
A ludicrous or bumbling person; a fool.
Enjoy! "
girard74 wrote on Mar 5, 2008 6:43 PM:
Your accusations; your incomprehensible post at 6:19?
Just what is your problem? "
danielh wrote on Mar 5, 2008 6:41 PM:
danielh wrote on Mar 5, 2008 6:39 PM:
I doubt he finally came to reality. I think he's going to some higher extremes right now. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 5, 2008 6:32 PM:
I have absolutely no idea what makes you tick, but that is certainly not my problem. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 5, 2008 6:27 PM:
girard74 wrote on Mar 5, 2008 6:21 PM:
Just 5 days ago, he was posting his laughter, saying that I was going mental because the LNS wouldn't publish my 9/11 Truther Letter.
I guess the LNS showed he was wrong.'
I have no idea what this means. What's up? "
danielh wrote on Mar 5, 2008 6:19 PM:
Just 5 days ago, he was posting his laughter, saying that I was going mental because the LNS wouldn't publish my 9/11 Truther Letter.
I guess the LNS showed he was wrong.
"
girard74 wrote on Mar 5, 2008 6:17 PM:
And I told you that it wasn't me because it wasn't me. Yet you continued with your rant. What was that all about? "
danielh wrote on Mar 5, 2008 6:13 PM:
Two weeks ago, two incoherent babbling imbeciles both published. My memory told me one of them was you, and perhaps I can’t remember which one of you it was. Maybe neither of them was you, and I just thought it was you. This was my mistake.
"
girard74 wrote on Mar 5, 2008 6:09 PM:
girard74 wrote on Mar 5, 2008 5:50 PM:
girard74 wrote on Mar 5, 2008 5:48 PM:
He didn't explain how a "wing commander" gets authorization to arm a nuclear warhead.'
Did you post this for my benefit? What do I care what some guy from Galt wrote? I already told you that it was NOT from me. What are you trying to prove here?
I was courteous and stated 'no problem' in response to your error. What more do you want?!? "
girard74 wrote on Mar 5, 2008 5:46 PM:
I somehow believe that you think that since your letters have been 'published' by the LNS, that you've somehow passed some type of journalistic ‘test’. I've got news for you - the LNS publishes practically every letter they receive. Just look at the nonsense that gets put into print!!
Have you ever had your letter edited? Of course not!!! Do you think that piece of crap up there would have ever made it past an apprentice editor in that condition?!?!? No way!!!
You sure think you're something special!! "
girard74 wrote on Mar 5, 2008 5:42 PM:
How do you know that I haven't had a letter 'published'? I can't be blamed that you don't recognize something that I've written. What do you want me to do, jump up and down and scream, "Look at me!! I got published!!!"? "
danielh wrote on Mar 5, 2008 5:42 PM:
danielh wrote on Mar 5, 2008 5:41 PM:
He didn't explain how a "wing commander" gets authorization to arm a nuclear warhead.
"
danielh wrote on Mar 5, 2008 5:39 PM:
I'd respect you more if you published an indefensible public letter.
Therefore, I repeat what I said last month: if you are so opinionated about what I said, then why don't you publish under the same public scrutiny as I have?
Otherwise, you really don't have faith and confidence in your own words, like I have in mine. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 5, 2008 5:35 PM:
Nope, not me. I live in Lodi. Not a problem. "
danielh wrote on Mar 5, 2008 5:33 PM:
nylodian wrote on Mar 5, 2008 5:29 PM:
"
WY wrote on Mar 5, 2008 4:22 PM:
"Your letter up there..." lol
You mean the one in the clouds? "
girard74 wrote on Mar 5, 2008 2:58 PM:
Regardless of whether you have 350 words or 3,500, the only way you can persuade anyone to accept your claims or ideas is to provide some sort of supporting evidence.
All the way through you failed. Who could have guessed that you had a background in aerospace and chemical engineering. You never gave us that information.
We were left guessing about how you came to these incredible conclusions.
Summary: pitiful. Sorry. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 5, 2008 2:41 PM:
girard74 wrote on Mar 5, 2008 2:38 PM:
I, along with this nation, endured eight years of a real liar in the White House - Clinton. President Bush has been nothing but the consummate professional. I would believe HIS words, without validation, over Clintons (and his wife) and YOURS any day of the week. Blind faith? No, just a little common sense as it pertains to you and the former CINC. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 5, 2008 2:35 PM:
You know, I really am curious which letter of mine you are referring to. Please enlighten me. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 5, 2008 2:33 PM:
Which letter was that? Why would I care if you did or did not respond to it?
It was you, a short time ago, who asked me what I thought of the author of a letter that was then being 'blogged.' I, knowing that you were the author, simply stated that I didn't think much of him or the letter. You took much offense to that and then went on the attack. It was a lot of fun, actually. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 5, 2008 2:30 PM:
When, if ever, did I claim that you were on any hook? I responded to YOUR insistence that I was somehow on the hook by refuting that claim. What are you talking about? "
girard74 wrote on Mar 5, 2008 2:27 PM:
You know, you're beginning to sound like another poor soul who visits these blogs from time to time. He is known as 'he who shall not be named.' According to him (and I suppose, now you), everyone is lying to you - no one is capable of the truth except you, wtf and the widows. Pity. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 5, 2008 2:24 PM:
'The department was created in response to the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks against the World Trade Center and the Pentagon (see September 11 Attacks) as a way to oversee and coordinate security functions previously performed by dozens of different government agencies.' (http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_701610362/department_of_homeland_security.html)
This is a quick reference that took me a short time to collect. More to follow.
'To establish a Department of Homeland Security, and for other purposes... January 1, 2003.' (http://www.whitehouse.gov/deptofhomeland/bill/) "
danielh wrote on Mar 5, 2008 2:16 PM:
Moreover, in case you haven't noticed, I completely ignored your published letter, by not responding to it in publication.
This totally shows that I did not consider my reputation at all threatened by your unsubstantiated opinionated letter.
Your letter did not address any of the most important facts of my letter. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 5, 2008 2:14 PM:
So, you're in charge now as to what someone does or does not agree with? Is that how this works?
To be perfectly blunt, the only thing even worth addressing from that particular post was the date. Everything else was simply too silly to respond to.
By my not addressing those things you think that I agree with what you wrote? You shouldn’t make such a ridiculous assumption. Again, such arrogance on your part will certainly be your undoing. "
danielh wrote on Mar 5, 2008 2:13 PM:
You think that is acceptable. I miss the martian date by a few years, and you use it to invalidate a report on 9/11.
Truth is that you believe anything that comes out of the mouth of the president, and belittle anyone that challenges his words.
Moreover, if someone contradicts the president on YouTube, you'll say fault lies in the internet.
Not much room for learning in your virgin information space upstairs. "
danielh wrote on Mar 5, 2008 2:10 PM:
President Bush was lying. He wanted America to believe that Homeland Security was created in response to 9/11.
Homeland Security was drafted 2 years prior by Senators Hart and Rudmann.
I have posted this fact inside the LNS at least a dozen times, and this doesn't seem to matter to you. "
danielh wrote on Mar 5, 2008 2:07 PM:
You can't deny anything about this story except the date.
"
danielh wrote on Mar 5, 2008 2:04 PM:
nylodian wrote on Mar 5, 2008 12:41 PM:
girard74 wrote on Mar 5, 2008 12:24 PM:
I'm not on any hook.
Dates don't matter? Details don't matter?
According to you, you're correct. And that's how you address the majority of your arguments. The only details that matter are those that support your agenda.
Dates DO matter. Details DO matter.
In fact, it's usually due to one's inattention to details that many ventures fail.
Your answer should have been, ‘You’re right. I was wrong.’
That would have ended the argument – you would have left me with nowhere to go. It’s your arrogance that will be your undoing. "
danielH wrote on Mar 5, 2008 12:03 PM:
You're trying to get yourself off the hook on an irrelevant technicality.
I don't have time for irrelevant stuff. If I did it right, you'd get yourself annoyed by something else that doesn't matter. Too bad. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 5, 2008 11:59 AM:
Anyone who makes a statement like you did in your letter that the aircraft 'WERE' unmanned and carried no human souls on board, had better have their ducks all in a row if they are to be taken seriously.
I need a lot more than what I've found so far on the Internet to be anywhere near comfortable with standing by such an authoritative position.
Your distorted view of the government, however, makes it easy for you to latch onto anything that supports your beliefs. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 5, 2008 11:48 AM:
Although minor, the radio broadcast took place in 1938. Normally I wouldn't bring this to anyone's attention. For you, however, your behavior demands that I be as factually accurate as I possibly can - I therefore must expect the same from you.
It would have been very simple for you to verify the actual date of the broadcast, yet I can only assume that you thought you were too intelligent to have to do that. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 5, 2008 11:43 AM:
You wrote, "Isn't it amazing how folks believe everything they read or see on the Internet?"'
I write, isn't it amazing how you parse words to fit your agenda. You conveniently left out, '...requires us to be much more discerning with regard to the validity and veracity of the information we access.'
I would submit that my thought that you omitted can also be applied to how we look at our government as well.
Your problem, as I see it, is that you see a conspiracy around EVERY corner - that's a sad life. "
danielH wrote on Mar 5, 2008 11:31 AM:
You wrote, "Isn't it amazing how folks believe everything they read or see on the Internet?"
I say, "Isn't it amazing how folks believe what the establishment-controlled news media tells them?"
If the establishment-controlled news media told us that aliens landed, I think people would believe them. Isn’t that what happened in the 1940’s? A radio broadcaster broadcast Martians were landed, and everybody believed him, because he was on the radio.
If Lodian published an alien landing, I think any learning-impaired person could pick it out, unless Lodian was on Fox, or Oprah. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 5, 2008 10:13 AM:
Isn't it amazing how folks believe everything they read or see on the Internet? While there is an incredible wealth of information available to us now as a result of this wonderful invention, it now requires us to be much more discerning with regard to the validity and veracity of the information we access. Sure, YouTube has some excellent information; but there's a lot of nonsense there as well. "
Lodian wrote on Mar 5, 2008 9:50 AM:
Huh? Please explain. "
Lodian wrote on Mar 5, 2008 9:48 AM:
Leonard wrote on Mar 5, 2008 8:35 AM:
" Leonard: I am quite proud of who I am and for the principles that I stand for.
Deal with it.
I am sure Osama is proud of you too. "
WY wrote on Mar 5, 2008 8:32 AM:
Metric Time System wrote on Mar 5, 2008 8:31 AM:
danielh wrote on Mar 5, 2008 8:25 AM:
Deal with it. "
Leonard wrote on Mar 5, 2008 8:09 AM:
In Japan, men who have completely dishonored themselves commit Seppuku.
If you had any sense of honor, you would take a long walk off a short pier. "
danielH wrote on Mar 5, 2008 7:55 AM:
danielH wrote on Mar 5, 2008 7:53 AM:
What's wrong with opening an investigation? There is enough evidence that shows the 9/11 commission report is incorrect.
If you were one of the people that you listed, would you not be disrespected if the government provided a report that was not subjected to public examination?
... if government officials who authored the 9/11 commission report refused to answer questions? "
danielH wrote on Mar 5, 2008 7:48 AM:
"
girard74 wrote on Mar 5, 2008 7:45 AM:
The best line that I can recall like this comes from Jon Voight in Varsity Blues. He says (as coach) to the quarterback kid that he doesn't like much, 'You know, you're the dumbest smart kid that I know.'
I just wished I had coined that phrase, although I've used it from time to time without giving credit (ooops, my bad). "
WY wrote on Mar 5, 2008 7:41 AM:
WY wrote on Mar 5, 2008 7:41 AM:
WY wrote on Mar 5, 2008 7:40 AM:
I've heard that some people can be so smart they're stupid. Is that the case here with this Hutchens guy? (So cold it's hot) "
Leonard wrote on Mar 5, 2008 7:06 AM:
" daniel you stated, "I can analyze this situation without allowing my emotions to cloud the truth."
I think your emotional connection to conspiracy theories do cloud your analysis and cause you to misconstrue facts to fit your agenda, as I've stated to you before.
And NY hits the nail directly on the head! "
girard74 wrote on Mar 5, 2008 6:41 AM:
You are absolutely correct. Thankfully, most of these 'conspiracy theories' remain just that, 'theories.' While we can argue back and forth here, generally speaking they don't get much traction.
It proves that when it comes to people, it takes all kinds to keep this old 'Blue Marble' turning round and round. "
nylodian wrote on Mar 5, 2008 6:32 AM:
* the very real victims on those planes whose lives ended in a firey explosion
* the victims in the towers and Pentagon
*) all the grieving family and loved ones left behind
* the rescue workers who risked their own lives to find survivors and retrieve remains
* the clean up crews
* those who were physically present and saw the attacks for themselves
* Our troops, especially the first to respond in Afghanistan, who are on a mission to eliminate Bin Laden and prevent future attacks "
nylodian wrote on Mar 5, 2008 6:20 AM:
I think your emotional connection to conspiracy theories do cloud your analysis and cause you to misconstrue facts to fit your agenda, as I've stated to you before.
"
trista wrote on Mar 5, 2008 12:57 AM:
trista wrote on Mar 5, 2008 12:55 AM:
trista wrote on Mar 5, 2008 12:54 AM:
"
danielh wrote on Mar 4, 2008 10:56 PM:
I didn't do the pentagon in this letter, because the cleanup inside the pentagon was under govt control, and there isn't any video evidence.
However, YouTube has a few reports which explains that two rotors from a Boeing 767 should have been found. Instead, only one was found, and it was much smaller. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 10:56 PM:
Someone did. There was reference to the gasoline truck that exploded and burned in the Bay Area last year. The heat generated from the burning fuel caused the 'steel' to weaken thereby causing that part of the roadway to collapse.
There were no other chemicals involved. When tested, the concrete showed no signs of distortion due to the fire (above or below). "
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 10:52 PM:
That type of attitude, as I've suggested too many times, reeks of arrogance - and I don't like arrogance. "
danielh wrote on Mar 4, 2008 10:52 PM:
Otherwise, noone has come up with anything contradictory. I have only appealed to a lot of emotions.
If someone is going to say that I am wrong, they have to find where I have missed a law of physics or chemistry somewhere; and, noone has done that. "
Cogito wrote on Mar 4, 2008 10:51 PM:
Cogito wrote on Mar 4, 2008 10:49 PM:
danielh wrote on Mar 4, 2008 10:49 PM:
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 10:48 PM:
If you wrote those sentences in the way that I believe you wrote them, then you are, as I suggested earlier, incredibly arrogant.
To suggest that people in Lodi cannot keep up with your superior intellect defies common sense. You don't know the backgrounds of anyone on this board, including me.
I've experienced many events in my lifetime and I have participated in many more. You don't 'own' all of the intelligence in this city.
You need to be knocked down (figuratively) a peg or two. "
Cogito wrote on Mar 4, 2008 10:44 PM:
danielh wrote on Mar 4, 2008 10:44 PM:
We're in the Matrix.
Would you be more comfortable if a qualified person presents stuff that doesn't matter? "
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 10:43 PM:
And you are also an expert on naval operations, rules of engagement and other military and governmental law, rules and directives.
You are the Renaissance man. "
danielh wrote on Mar 4, 2008 10:42 PM:
I tried pointing toward a couple features on the "aircraft," and forget it. I'm in Lodi.
"
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 10:40 PM:
Now you know that is not what I meant. The fact that your two latest letters were about two separate 'government-involved' conspiracies would lead any normal-thinking person to wonder about either your agenda or your intelligence.
My experience with you in these blogs, however, doesn't cause me to doubt your brain-power. That leaves me with but one conclusion. "
Cogito wrote on Mar 4, 2008 10:40 PM:
danielh wrote on Mar 4, 2008 10:40 PM:
The Major General in the reference says the airplane doesn't fit through the hole.
The other link made an analogy with Shirlock Holmes, who stated that "the dog did not bark" during the home invasion; therefore, the owner was the criminal.
The first link makes reference to building construction engineers. You could study them if you want.
YouTube gives excellent reports.
They also have Newtonian Physics. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 10:37 PM:
Please don't lose your optimism. Sure, you've only got 350 words (although if you write a letter and 'mail' it your chances of bypassing that limit are greatly increased (just a hint).
Yet, even if you DO have 350 words, I only suggest that you use each and every one that accurately conveys what you think, along with why you think that way. Thus, this causes people to think about your opinions. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 10:34 PM:
danielh wrote on Mar 4, 2008 10:34 PM:
Your logic doesn't follow. You state that when somebody says something twice, it must be wrong.
How ironic! You are using faulty logic to say that someone has faulty logic.
Let me remind you that I only get 350 words, and the government has unlimited press coverage, and blessings from every major network for everything that they say.
"
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 10:33 PM:
Someone suggested that people shouldn't get so upset about an opinionated 'Letter-to-the-Editor.' The problem is that other people read these letters and then possibly base their own opinions upon what they’ve read; believing, perhaps that because it was 'published,' it must somehow carry more weight.
I would just suggest a little more journalistic responsibility before submission. "
Cogito wrote on Mar 4, 2008 10:29 PM:
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 10:26 PM:
And THIS proves what? You refer to the 'widows' with such a sense of awe and wonder; as if only 'they' hold the key to the real answers.
Kissinger spilling his drink and resigning - ???? This is anecdotal at best. There have been many people affected by this tragedy, even old retired bureaucrats. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 10:23 PM:
I know the building. And you believe that this is proof of what? - that someone was about ready to ignite some sort of explosive?
There is absolutely no doubt that the collapse of the two towers created a force of energy unlike anything that has ever been experienced in that kind of environment.
Couldn't it have been that force, accompanied by other elements (surrounding fire, fuel, debris, etc.) that combined to bring it down? Must it have been a conspiracy? "
danielh wrote on Mar 4, 2008 10:20 PM:
The "9/11 Truthers" have got it going on. "
danielh wrote on Mar 4, 2008 10:18 PM:
I saw Ron Paul twice, and I don't remember his talking about a govt conspiracy behind 9/11. I might have heard him talking about the govt taking advantage of the situation to establish Dept of Homeland Security, but otherwise, he's not involved in this.
Ron Paul is more likely to talk about our nation's monetary system, the IRS, border security, and constitutionality of using America's armed forces. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 10:18 PM:
The problem that I see with your stance, is that this is the second letter (in a row) regarding suspected conspiracies involving the U.S. government.
Each time you've made statements without providing any support, except for the reader to attempt to follow your logic through the use of hyperlinks.
I suspect that YOU suspect virtually every action ever taken by our people in government; it's as if you're seeking problems where they simply don't exist. "
Cogito wrote on Mar 4, 2008 10:13 PM:
danielh wrote on Mar 4, 2008 10:09 PM:
I repeat there is a Major General who insists that the aircraft that was supposed to have slammed into the pentagon does not fit through the hole.
There are about 25 military personnel ranking at or above O-5.
These are people wearing a uniform of the armed forces, sworn and commissioned by the president of the US to uphold and defend the US constitution.
So this isn't just a crack story from an Acampolidian. "
Cogito wrote on Mar 4, 2008 10:08 PM:
danielh wrote on Mar 4, 2008 10:05 PM:
danielh wrote on Mar 4, 2008 10:03 PM:
Questions I have are:
1) Design of the joints?
2) What chemicals were burning?
"
Cogito wrote on Mar 4, 2008 10:02 PM:
danielh wrote on Mar 4, 2008 9:57 PM:
Cogito wrote on Mar 4, 2008 9:54 PM:
danielh wrote on Mar 4, 2008 9:51 PM:
danielh wrote on Mar 4, 2008 9:50 PM:
Remember: The Solomon building also fell down, although it was not hit by an aircraft.
British news reported on the collapse of the Solomon building, while it was still standing.
I heard one report of personnel giving a countdown before to warn people of the collapse of the Solomon building.
"
danielh wrote on Mar 4, 2008 9:44 PM:
I appreciate your love for our country.
Perhaps I can offer a suggestion that it is people in the government, and not the government itself. If there is anything that I can change in the letter, in paragraph #2, I think that would be it.
However, I am certain that this attack was involved at the top of our government.
That is why I am campaigning for this cause. People are not aware of what sort of transactions take place at the top. "
danielh wrote on Mar 4, 2008 9:25 PM:
Read the reference. "
danielh wrote on Mar 4, 2008 9:24 PM:
Have you ever heard of an oxyacetylene torch? These don't work until you inject oxygen.
In an oxyacetylene torch, the flame is blue. "
danielh wrote on Mar 4, 2008 9:22 PM:
She was not standing in what people term molten steel.
How about the FDNY fire department requesting 2 hose teams. This is hardly a description of a molten-hot inferno.
Fuel burns in air, not in an enclosed container. Black smoke indicates unburned carbon particles (and carbon monoxide) indicative of a fuel-rich fire (which would be cold).
The MIT professor (who contributed to the official report) also knew that the metal could not attain temperature any warmer than the fuel. "
danielh wrote on Mar 4, 2008 9:17 PM:
I only heard it from a disc jockey in Sacramento. "
Cogito wrote on Mar 4, 2008 8:07 PM:
Gator wrote on Mar 4, 2008 8:00 PM:
worth the time except to stir the pot.
Truthers like Ron Paul are just plain out beyound the black stump!!! "
Cogito wrote on Mar 4, 2008 7:48 PM:
Cogito wrote on Mar 4, 2008 7:39 PM:
Cogito wrote on Mar 4, 2008 7:33 PM:
Ivan Dixon wrote on Mar 4, 2008 6:59 PM:
Gator wrote on Mar 4, 2008 5:55 PM:
magnesium powder not aluminum as it burns about 5 times hotter and is very
easy to ignite,infact it will self ignite
under the right conditions.My self I
prefer ammonium nitrate and Nitromethane as the kicker...I held a
state of California Blasting lic. for about 15 years... "
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 5:52 PM:
I have read, however, that the temperatures required for steel to react as it did are somewhat lower than what has been generally accepted by those on the conspiracy side.
Finally, until I am presented with clear, logical, unbiased and fully corroborated proof, I'll side with the United States, not against it. That hasn't occurred within this blog.
"
Sensible Sage wrote on Mar 4, 2008 5:41 PM:
danielh wrote on Mar 4, 2008 5:35 PM:
danielh wrote on Mar 4, 2008 5:34 PM:
Gator wrote on Mar 4, 2008 5:33 PM:
Torpedo Bomber into Pearl harbor and his
plane sank the Arizona!!!Honest in-jin. "
danielh wrote on Mar 4, 2008 5:33 PM:
When the WTC was cleaned up, the presence of aluminum oxide powder would have corroborated other thermite evidence.
In film, molten iron is pouring off the side of the building. This is thermite, not a result of jet fuel. Jet fuel burns too cold.
"
danielh wrote on Mar 4, 2008 5:30 PM:
This is a reaction that burns at 6000-6500 degrees. It ignites around 4000-4500 degrees. One person who was not being safe burned his hand OFF. That’s OFF, with a bone stub sticking out.
I am so certain that jet fuel cannot ignite thermite, that I was not afraid to ignite the fuse with a torch flame, without a fear of it igniting, before I would get away.
Thermite evidence, alone, would provide conviction against the government, by a jury of qualified chemists, chemical engineers, and building demolition experts. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 5:24 PM:
And who, exactly, was Khalid Sheikh Mohammed? Was he CIA, FBI, InterPol, Highway Patrol or Camp Fire Girls? "
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 5:21 PM:
I know a Cub Scout Pack just around the corner who could probably show you.
Again, you may have your sources and you're entitled to your opinion. Your conclusions, however, are incredibly suspect. "
danielh wrote on Mar 4, 2008 5:18 PM:
Additionally, the air attack required coordination with ground operations to wire the buildings for demolition.
The attack also took place when our air defenses were stood down.
This was no Osama Bin Laden operation.
I would welcome anyone to show how such a large scale set of circumstances could have been anyone outside of the government without a prerequisite amount of cooperation with our armed forces.
"
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 5:00 PM:
That one small phrase permitted me to understand that you based your opinion on something other than thin air. I don't believe what you said is truth, but I could not deny that you had some sort of source and basis for what you believe.
The rest of your letter was left wide open. "
citizen wrote on Mar 4, 2008 4:52 PM:
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 4:48 PM:
I wanted to know why YOU believed something. No website provided me with information that you were in aerospace or that YOU had seen an aircraft that formed a basis for your opinion.
Many people who read the LNS don't own a computer. How would they have ever understood that there may have been some basis for what you were setting forth. They wouldn't.
My opinion is that you do not communicate very well. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 4:46 PM:
I do all the challenging that I want, thanks.
When the messenger fails to accurately or adequately deliver the message, he/she should expect to be queried further.
Did you expect I would take your word for something simply because you said it? You said you were aerospace - you said that you viewed a picture of an aircraft.
Don't you see how that information, not before known, can alter the tenor of the conversation? Or is that lost on you? (cont.) "
danielh wrote on Mar 4, 2008 4:46 PM:
Several of the people are wearing the uniform of the US armed forces, having sworn an oath to uphold and defend the US constitution.
...and they don't live in Lodi.
You should produce 500 citations, and 500 honorary names for all those qualified people as well. "
citizen wrote on Mar 4, 2008 4:45 PM:
danielh wrote on Mar 4, 2008 4:43 PM:
When you write a letter objecting to mine, I'm certain to respond that I gave a website containing 500 people who are more qualified than me, and more important, and you ignored their opinions.
There is a Major General in that website who said that the passenger airliner that was supposed to have hit the pentagon does not fit through the hole.
That's a pretty convincing statement.
...but not convincing enough for ignorance that refuses to listen to qualified people. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 4:39 PM:
Then why did you not put that in your letter? Simply leaving the sentence as it is, with absolutely no explanation or authority, makes you 'appear' as a nutcase.
While I still don't agree with you, I can at least see now where you arrived at that conclusion. "
danielh wrote on Mar 4, 2008 4:37 PM:
"
danielh wrote on Mar 4, 2008 4:36 PM:
I don't care to challenge you to show me proof of living souls, because it would be possible to write a website and say it is a eulogy.
"
danielh wrote on Mar 4, 2008 4:34 PM:
I worked in aerospace for 7 years, on hardware that was worth a lot more than airplane or missiles, so when I see something that does not belong on aerospace hardware, I have a pretty good amount of knowledge to know what I am talking about.
Part of the problem of my presenting this information to non-engineering types, is that they don't speak the same language as me. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 4:25 PM:
I ask again - How do you know that this happened? What is your proof? "
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 4:22 PM:
Anything is possible; yet not all things are probable. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 4:21 PM:
I read the paragraph.
I submit that you don't read much of what people say; only what you want to see. Pity.
Much of my argument about this letter is that the Hutchins firmly stated that these things "did" happen. His opinions would have been better received and perhaps even respected had he merely 'believed' that they occurred.
Yet, by his words, it can be assumed that he has proof of these claims. I only ask for the proof. "
danielh wrote on Mar 4, 2008 4:15 PM:
Who dunnit? Before this letter was published, I just posted to Girard that I have a name, but it disturbs me very much.
The actual name doesn't matter, because society is responsible for allowing our government to expand a police state and to remain in power without having a public disclosure of the facts. "
wtf wrote on Mar 4, 2008 4:11 PM:
wtf wrote on Mar 4, 2008 4:07 PM:
Daniel, look at the date of the document. It is 13 March 1962. This is a declassified government document. Documents of this type are not declassified overnight. Page 10, item 8, outlines a scenario that corresponds with what Mr. Hutchins is alleging in his letter and therefore, shows a precedent for what happened on 9-11. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 4:05 PM:
I should have stated that you and danielH are cyber-connected at the hip. Thanks for correcting me.
I apologize to anyone who was offended or confused by my prior remark. No offense or confusion was intended.
My name is girard74 and I approve this message. "
danielh wrote on Mar 4, 2008 4:03 PM:
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 4:02 PM:
You are correct, it is his opinion. My suggestion was just that, a 'suggestion.' Perhaps if he HAD re-worded much of what he had written, it would not have come across as silly or even stupid as it has (in my opinion). "
danielh wrote on Mar 4, 2008 4:02 PM:
Emotions don't change facts, and news media uses peoples' pain to cover-up the facts. Not me. I can analyze this situation without allowing my emotions to cloud the truth.
As for Leonard, he and I go back 2 years, and he craves something to argue about. He'll be OK. I don't know what he looks like, but I could identify him if he were talking to me.
"
scout wrote on Mar 4, 2008 4:01 PM:
Sensible Sage wrote on Mar 4, 2008 3:59 PM:
wtf wrote on Mar 4, 2008 3:58 PM:
That's right! I forgot, they're here in Lodi! LOL! A bit early for the Grape Festival though. ;0 "
danielh wrote on Mar 4, 2008 3:54 PM:
wtf wrote on Mar 4, 2008 3:53 PM:
This is a very good question. Perhaps Mr. Hutchins statement would have carried more weight if it had been phrased:
Certain elements within our government aided the attack; either through negligence or willful participation.
This, to me, would be a valid statement in that those who support the official theory, cannot prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that certain elements within the government we not involved. "
wtf wrote on Mar 4, 2008 3:48 PM:
LOL! I wouldn't know danielH if I tripped over him (thanks for that one, nylodian ;)
girard74 went on to say, "My unsolicited advice to you - you might want to have your letters reviewed before having them 'published.'"
Earth to girard74...this is letter published in the OPINION column. This is Mr. Hutchins' *opinion* - why does it bother you so much? You obviously have a different opinion - which is your right.
Kudos to the LNS for allowing people to speak whether good, bad or indifferent. "
Gator wrote on Mar 4, 2008 3:47 PM:
pipe and took out tower #1 which in turn
dropped #2 after which he and Black elk
smoked a pipe full and smashed #7..Then
they ate a few mushrooms and said so
much for you white eye!!! And all lived
with lucy in the sky for the rest of time!!! "
nylodian wrote on Mar 4, 2008 3:45 PM:
wtf wrote on Mar 4, 2008 3:42 PM:
Below is a link to a declassified government document entitled Operation Northwoods. Go to page 10 and read the item numbered 8.
The aliens tell me you won't even bother girard74, since it might interfere with *your* depiction of things...even though this is a declassified government document...girard74 knows all. LOL!
girard74: A legend in his own mind. LOL!
Here's the link anyway. It's from George Washington University.
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/northwoods.pdf "
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 3:34 PM:
nylodian wrote on Mar 4, 2008 3:31 PM:
I wouldn't know Leonard if I tripped over him, but if you are making light of his witnessing the horror first-hand, that is beyond vile. I do know people, like Leonard, who witnessed the attacks with their own eyes. I know people who scraped up human ash from the debris. I know health care workers who volunteered at the hospitals after the attacks. None of them support your theories. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 3:30 PM:
I supplied that link in an effort to exhibit that for each hyperlink the author set forth (in his letter), there are many others that counter his claims.
Mostly, however, if I ever refer to a website by providing the link, it is for the purposes of giving credit to my source - not to expect someone to have to navigate there to understand my points. You, however, often times simply publish the link with little or no explanation. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 3:24 PM:
There is no doubt that there were literally thousands of events that occurred in the span of just a few hours. Isolating just a few cannot possibly give an accurate picture of everything that happened.
From what I remember, radio contact from within the buildings was abysmal. How does anyone know what was attempted to be communicated to those outside or even inside, for that matter? "
nylodian wrote on Mar 4, 2008 3:23 PM:
And you consider YouTube a reliable, infallible source for you theories?
"
nylodian wrote on Mar 4, 2008 3:20 PM:
"
wtf wrote on Mar 4, 2008 3:18 PM:
And *you* supplied a link to *your* conspiracy website because....? "
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 3:18 PM:
Scout, I asked the same question and was informed by danielH that his theories are contained in prior letters to the editor (over the past couple of years) and that’s where we are to glean that information.
I informed him that not all of us believe his 'writings' to be all that memorable. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 3:15 PM:
Actually, the debate here is about some of the outlandish claims by Hutchins, e.g., unmanned aircraft; Secret Service knowledge; his flawed chemistry regarding the melting point of steel.
In other posts I had been admonished to accept that there was a conspiracy because the 'widows' believed that it must be true.
Debating on logical, serious issues makes for healthy, heated discourse. Silliness, such as what is contained in the majority of this letter only inflames people unnecessarily. "
wtf wrote on Mar 4, 2008 3:15 PM:
LOL! Good point, danielH; how *would* he know what was in them? "
scout wrote on Mar 4, 2008 3:12 PM:
"
wtf wrote on Mar 4, 2008 3:11 PM:
LOL! Shhhh....don't tell anyone; it was them aliens who live in Roswell, NM. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 3:10 PM:
You weren't agreeing with me. You were pointing out something from a website that I referred to that seemed to run contrary to my contentions, specifically concerning Iraq, that we have 'debated' before. That was the basis for my response to you. You've behaved this way before; I wasn't going to let this one go. Don't be so disingenuous. "
wtf wrote on Mar 4, 2008 3:09 PM:
Not those who support the official theory nor those who refute it. Somewhere, between all the heated pros and cons, is the truth of this ugly matter; because, those who are so vehement that our government could not have done this, are just as deluded as those who are convinced it could. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 3:05 PM:
If you did (which I doubt), I would be interested in learning about their reactions. Knowing that you and wtf are joined at the hip, I would have thought you would have sought his/her counsel. From an earlier post here from him, however, it is obvious that you did not.
My unsolicited advice to you - you might want to have your letters reviewed before having them 'published.' "
wtf wrote on Mar 4, 2008 3:01 PM:
Yes I did and it was from the site that *you* provided a link for. Somehow, it seems to me, that you will never be satisfied and appear to only want to initiate confrontations with your pseudo intellectualism.
Even when I've agreed with you, you proceed to whine about it. Real Facts definitely has your number. LOL! "
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 3:01 PM:
It's YOUR contentions that are at issue here; not why I haven't tried to support or tear down your theories. I have addressed the majority of your silly letter with no viable response from you.
So, when you provide corroboration for your contention that the airliners were empty and were drones and when you address the silliness behind your contention that the Secret Service knew of this conspiracy and yet have held their silence for years (ignoring your ludicrous 'blood oath' theory), then maybe we can move on. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 2:54 PM:
You and others use this tactic of supplying links to other 'conspiracy theory' websites rather than actually state your contentions.
One of two things happens - first, it takes hours to pore through the information on the link; or second, the supporting evidence, if you could call it that, is either as flimsy or more so than the contentions set forth by the original author.
You had enough words left in your letter to put forth YOUR contentions. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 2:51 PM:
That is so incomprehensible that I'm sitting here dying of laughter. From your perspective, anyone who knows 'anything' about this so-called conspiracy is worrying about their own execution if they dare open their mouths? Puhleeease!!! "
Leonard wrote on Mar 4, 2008 2:47 PM:
This individual is beneath contempt. Has he no shame? "
danielH wrote on Mar 4, 2008 2:29 PM:
The second one is disturbing also. "
danielH wrote on Mar 4, 2008 2:28 PM:
FDNY exclaimed about the rivers of molten metal, like the inside of a foundry. This corroborates the fact of thermite.
FDNY exclaimed about the fact of multiple consecutive explosions. This corroborates a controlled demolition.
And why does one need to look into YouTube to see witnesses exclaim that the 2nd aircraft did not have any windows, and it wasn't a commercial airliner?
You might have seen people standing next to Leonard. "
Ziggy wrote on Mar 4, 2008 2:26 PM:
danielH wrote on Mar 4, 2008 2:23 PM:
"
danielH wrote on Mar 4, 2008 2:23 PM:
danielH wrote on Mar 4, 2008 2:21 PM:
This is hardly a description of a building that is ready to melt. "
danielH wrote on Mar 4, 2008 2:19 PM:
"
The other combustibles in the area do not cause a fire that coudl be enough.
If you recall the huge and impressive fire ball, it burned outside the building, and black smoke means the fire was fuel-rich, meaning a cold fire.
Additionally, if you read my letter, you see a fireman is requesting two hose teams. The fire was mostly reduced to two locations, almost OUT. "
Leonard wrote on Mar 4, 2008 2:15 PM:
danielH wrote on Mar 4, 2008 2:14 PM:
danielH wrote on Mar 4, 2008 2:12 PM:
danielH wrote on Mar 4, 2008 2:11 PM:
You can’t find one single freemason who will talk, and also provide verification.
In the Council on Foreign Relations, Skull and Bones, and Trilateral commission, they don’t talk.
Bilderbergs don’t even divulge the roster.
The Security and Prosperity Partnership is secretive.
These persons won't talk.
"
danielH wrote on Mar 4, 2008 2:09 PM:
Each time I read about the story, I keep getting a new twist in the story. It’s like the SAW movie series, now on episode #4. The story goes over to Oklahoma City, and through a dead prisoner in the pen.
I never found closure on what really happened.
In all the studying that I have done, I never encountered his name as being associated with the "
OTH wrote on Mar 4, 2008 1:54 PM:
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 1:28 PM:
What, pray tell, is your corroborated evidence to support this incredible claim?
Since the totality of this letter is simply too laughable, I'm not surprised that this accusation has been overlooked; much like his claims that the Secret Service was also involved in this inconceivable conspiracy.
This page of the LNS will no doubt find its way to the bottom of quite a few bird cages. "
nylodian wrote on Mar 4, 2008 1:09 PM:
nylodian wrote on Mar 4, 2008 1:06 PM:
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 12:26 PM:
Sorry, but I did find danielH's reference in an earlier post.
In response to that reference, however, it simply doesn't make any sense. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 12:20 PM:
This statement helps to prove to me that the events of 9/11 could not have been a U.S.-caused conspiracy.
Remember, in order for three people to keep a secret, two of them must be dead. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 12:15 PM:
By slamming the door on others' beliefs (and many of those based upon the same science and published facts), invites biting retorts. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 12:10 PM:
Sorry Gator, but Rosie O'Donnell said that fire could not melt steel. She said it, I heard it, that makes it true! "
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 12:08 PM:
What? You simply ignore the rest of the thought? I then wrote, '...certainly the jet fuel, along with other combustibles in the area, could very easily have caused the steel to weaken (melt) as you insist it could not.'
The folly in your contentions is largely due to your insistence that you give no wriggle room whatsoever as to other 'possibilities.' That's foolish writing when discussing 'subjective' issues. "
Gator wrote on Mar 4, 2008 12:08 PM:
melting point of typical structural steel; ~825ºC (1517ºF) - maximum temperature of hydrocarbon ...
"
Gator wrote on Mar 4, 2008 12:04 PM:
danielH wrote on Mar 4, 2008 12:02 PM:
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 11:58 AM:
I fail to get your point on this. Please, enlighten us as to how your belief (insistence) that we (the U.S.) brought down two of our tallest buildings and in the process murdered thousands of our own citizens, is remotely connected to the rise of Adolph Hitler. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 11:54 AM:
You missed the point. Without the proper flame-retardant materials in place (as it was proved previously that it wasn't), certainly the jet fuel, along with other combustibles in the area, could very easily have caused the steel to weaken (melt) as you insist it could not.
The fact that neither you, nor I was present when and where those fires were roaring provides clear support that it is, in fact, a 'matter of judgment.' "
danielH wrote on Mar 4, 2008 11:47 AM:
Lodian wrote on Mar 4, 2008 11:46 AM:
The power of suggestion is strong. "
danielH wrote on Mar 4, 2008 11:43 AM:
Hitler's deceptive attack against the Reich Building was a deceptive milestone.
What happened to the people that opposed the Third Reich?
Gustapo successfully recruited people to spy on their own family members. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 11:42 AM:
The title, along with the poorly-supported statements in the letter, state very well that Hutchins is not open to any other 'possibilities', when it is so clear apparent that it is not only possible, but probable, that the event did not 'go down' as Hutchins suggests. "
Leonard wrote on Mar 4, 2008 11:39 AM:
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 11:38 AM:
Many people state that something 'may' be the truth. There is a significant difference between a 'possibility' that something occurred (all things are possible), and stating that something 'did' in fact happen.
The author never stated that his contentions are 'possible.' He states, categorically, that '[i]t is not possible for burning jet fuel to weaken steel,' leaving no room for the possibility that it can. Again, intelligence-challenged arrogance.
Without clear evidence to the contrary, I will not 'believe' our government capable of such a heinous act. "
danielH wrote on Mar 4, 2008 11:38 AM:
Generally, a good newspaper will print material that contradicts its own opinion. This shows that it is not trying to take control of public opinion.
"
danielH wrote on Mar 4, 2008 11:37 AM:
I really like what you said about opening a new investigation. If terrorists knocked down the building then people who are dead-set on that opinion have nothing to worry about, right?
Leonard: What would be the consequences for implicating the wrong defendant?
"
wtf wrote on Mar 4, 2008 11:20 AM:
Viewing these videos, I think they could have been photo shopped. Also, there are links to the "devil" images that aren't outlined and, quite frankly, I don't see them unless they're highlighted.
So it could simply be a case of one seeing what they want to see and forming a consensus by highlighting the perceived images. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 11:15 AM:
Aside from perhaps you and your mother, very few of us have taken the time to create a scrapbook or place your previous letters on our refrigerators with cute little magnets.
Even well-seasoned journalists and occasional writers either preface their pieces with the purpose for their contentions or include it somewhere in the body. To assume that we, the readers, somehow 'remember' what you wrote previously is the height of arrogance.
Your 'work' is simply not that memorable. "
Gator wrote on Mar 4, 2008 11:12 AM:
who???How about all the plastic items
computers,floring,furniture ect.Steel
did not melt it was weakend and bent it
lost it's tensile strength and down it
went...The head Fire cheif of the New
york Fire Department said there would
never be another building built like that again in New York..The whack jobs
are going to belive what they want,so
who really gives a damn.As many leaks as there are in government they could never keep a thing like that quite.But
then pigs can fly,can't they??? "
wtf wrote on Mar 4, 2008 11:09 AM:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4YsLnIFEr4&feature=related
There are several on YouTube. Just do a search for "devil in twin towers" "
Leonard wrote on Mar 4, 2008 11:06 AM:
wtf wrote on Mar 4, 2008 10:56 AM:
http://www.debunking911.com/conspiracy.htm
For me, the truth is somewhere between the extremes. "
wtf wrote on Mar 4, 2008 10:55 AM:
"The evidence for a conspiracy to use 9/11 to invade Iraq is significant. While there is not one shred of evidence the government blew up the World Trade Center, there is evidence that they used the tragedy to remove Saddam Hussein using poor WMD evidence...I want to make this clear..." (cont) "
OTH wrote on Mar 4, 2008 10:36 AM:
Lodian wrote on Mar 4, 2008 10:19 AM:
Lodian wrote on Mar 4, 2008 10:18 AM:
Leonard wrote on Mar 4, 2008 10:16 AM:
Shame on the Lodi News Sentinel for publishing this disgusting rubbish "
Lodian wrote on Mar 4, 2008 10:16 AM:
Leonard wrote on Mar 4, 2008 9:38 AM:
From now on, Daniel Hutchins will be known by his Al Queda brethren as Danni Bin Lyin' "
Leonard wrote on Mar 4, 2008 9:33 AM:
Leonard wrote on Mar 4, 2008 9:33 AM:
The next time a terrorist kills an American, lets all remember to thank Danni for contributing to their motivation. "
wtf wrote on Mar 4, 2008 9:21 AM:
wtf wrote on Mar 4, 2008 9:20 AM:
After all, those of you who support the "official" conspiracy shouldn't have anything to worry about, right? You should be confident that your theory is the correct one.
A re-investigation into 9-11, looking at *all* the evidence would put this thing to bed once and for all. Then those supporting the "official" conspiracy wouldn't have to resort to ad hominem attacks to support their theory. "
Cogito wrote on Mar 4, 2008 8:47 AM:
danielH wrote on Mar 4, 2008 8:40 AM:
The outcome from 9/11 was Dept of Homeland Security. You judge if it was the purpose.
You may recall that President Bush stated that the legislation for Homeland Security was established in a few days as a response to 9/11. Lie! It was created 2-years prior as the Hart-Rudmann Act.
Compare Homeland Security to the Nazi Gustapo, which was created in response to Hitler's attack on his own Reich Building. "
Cogito wrote on Mar 4, 2008 8:22 AM:
Cogito wrote on Mar 4, 2008 8:21 AM:
Cogito wrote on Mar 4, 2008 8:17 AM:
Cogito wrote on Mar 4, 2008 8:14 AM:
wtf wrote on Mar 4, 2008 8:12 AM:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6470450895164255089&hl=en
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4113276458031151696
We all play the game that Republicans and Democrats are different from one another; but, deep down, we know they're one and the same. "
wtf wrote on Mar 4, 2008 8:06 AM:
http://www.911weknow.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=34&Itemid=31 "
wtf wrote on Mar 4, 2008 8:05 AM:
What you are about to see is information you should already know. Our news reporters, government and media should have made all this material available to every one of us. Ask yourself why you’ve never seen it.” "
wtf wrote on Mar 4, 2008 8:04 AM:
“My name is Brad and I’m a conservative Republican. Last summer I happened to come across a video on the Internet about the World Trade Center demolition on September 11th. As a kind of “demolition hobbyist,” I downloaded it and watched it. The title was “Painful Deceptions,” by a guy called Eric Hufschmid. The video made me very angry. I was determined to prove the maker of the video wrong.
"
wtf wrote on Mar 4, 2008 8:02 AM:
Of course, the usual apologists will rant today without checking any facts. However, for those interested in actually looking at the evidence, not just blatantly dismissing it out of hand, here are some links:
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/archives/cat_911.html
"
Cogito wrote on Mar 4, 2008 8:01 AM:
wtf wrote on Mar 4, 2008 7:56 AM:
Though I may suspect certain elements in the government of being aware of the danger, I wouldn't go so far as to make such a blanket statement.
The fact is, no one really knows what happened; which is why there should be another, independent, objective investigation.
What bothered me most after this tragedy was how quickly the debris from the Towers was whisked off to China for scrap when it should have been retained for the forensics team. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 7:54 AM:
What purpose would be served to inform the Secret Service that its own government was about to fell buildings that would kill thousands of Americans? In order to effectively carry this out, the fewer who knew of its inception, the better. There would be absolutely NO REASON WHATSOEVER to inform the Secret Service and absent their knowledge, there would have also been no reason whatsoever to order them to stand down.
Again, nonsense. "
Cogito wrote on Mar 4, 2008 7:49 AM:
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 7:49 AM:
Of course you wouldn't. To do so would be to invite exactly the kind of responses that you will be receiving today - that your contentions are based upon nothing but junk science and fear-mongering. "
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 7:47 AM:
What was the purpose of this so-called government-induced tragedy?
For each supporting 'authority' provided (term used very loosely), there are many others destroying this theory. Just one is - http://www.debunking911.com/thermite.htm.
Just another anti-Bush, anti-American rant. "
danielH wrote on Mar 4, 2008 7:34 AM:
FYI: This is not the JBS, which has published to the contrary.
FYI: This letter was submitted 3 weeks ago. Prior to publication, I would never divulge a pending letter. "
Gator wrote on Mar 4, 2008 7:28 AM:
helmet... "
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 7:16 AM:
The only thing that this letter proves is that there will be a host of 'comments' posted declaring its author to be on psychotropic drugs or suffering from severe advanced dementia. "
Educated Reader wrote on Mar 4, 2008 7:11 AM:
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 7:05 AM:
girard74 wrote on Mar 4, 2008 7:02 AM:
Comments on this story are now closed.