I Question the Timing
What are the odds that Osama Bin Laden would bite the bullet on the fifth anniversary of this blog? Something like 75 trillion to one?
PS: Yipppeeeeee!
Update:
posted by Pat @ 7:55 PM
107 comments
As Seen in Vanity Fair's August 2006 Issue!
As Seen in US News & World Report's September 11 Fifth Anniversary Issue!
As Seen in Time Magazine's September 11, 2006 Issue!
As Seen in Phoenix New Times' August 9, 2007 Issue!
Sunday, May 01, 2011
PS: Yipppeeeeee!
Update:
Previous Posts
- Who Says Actors Are Like, Um, You Know, Airheads
- Richard Gage Cites Holocaust Denier Anthony Lawson
- Time to Make Fun of Richard Gage Again
- Steven Jones Once Again Behind the Curve
- Gallop's Appeal Dismissed
- How America became the land of Truthers, Triggers,...
- Wikileaks Shocker: al Qaeda Behind 9/11
- Why Do They Believe In Conspiracy Theories?
- Much Hilarity
- How Stupid Is....
View My Stats
Allies:
107 Comments:
Great news. Finally.
Hey Brian, can you tell us again how the US deliberately let bin Laden go?
I'm sure George W. Bush was just itching to let his successor (a Democrat, no less) be able to claim credit for nailing bin Laden.
You wouldn't believe how many strings I had to poul to arrange this one.
Guys, have a little sympathy. Brian is no doubt in mourning.
At least we now have the answer when some dope asks why OSB has not been indicted for 911.
I would have preferred to see a trial. Main Suspect Dead, Cased Closed is poor practice.
Yes the US let him go in 2001, no question. Things change. It was always a question of balancing his value as a bogeyman vs. the embarrassment in letting him run free. In 2001 his bogeyman value was high--in 2011 with no viable followup attacks he no longer had any.
I would have preferred to see a trial.
Me too. I'm guessing that ol' bin just wasn't going to be taken alive. It would have been nice if we had gotten Hitler too. C'est la vie.
Yes the US let him go in 2001, no question.
Of course, no question. Hey, when a failed janitor and babbling liar asserts something with absolutely no evidence, you know it's true!
It was always a question of balancing his value as a bogeyman vs. the embarrassment in letting him run free.
Of course. Like I said, I'm sure George W. Bush really wanted the next guy to get him.
In 2001 his bogeyman value was high--in 2011 with no viable followup attacks he no longer had any.
Oh, so bin Laden attacked us now? What happened to spray-on thermite?
Hey Brian, do you think the floozy Jersey trash you call "widows" are upset right now? I bet. After all, even fewer people will pay them any attention now.
Really? Wow, that is kind of cool.
Also, on the topic of bad guys who were taken alive, Slobodan Milosevic died in prison before he could be tried.
Don't you find that suspicious, Brian? Don't you know that there's doubt about the official Srebrenica story? Don't you know that Osama bin Laden was aiding the Bosniaks in their genocide against Serbia?
I know all this stuff because I know how to Google, unlike you.
Suck it twoofers. freedom wins again over your bullshit propaganda blood money.
James and Pat, I guarantee that there will be lots of whining and sour grapes from the truthers over this (since they think the world revolves around them). Please post the best examples here. Bonus points if Jon Gold gets especially pissy.
Brian, perhaps you have forgotten KSM, whose tribunal will be coming up eventually?
May 1, 1945......
Another coincidence?
Twoofers will resurface.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Pat, I haven't forgotten KSM's tribunal. Marx said: "Military justice is to justice what military music is to music."
For the DoJ to pretend that if they couldn't try him in NYC then they couldn't try him in a civilian court at all seems strange to me.
This represents a loss of face for Pakistan in NATO countries.
http://soundcloud.com/ewing2001/bright-shouldaz-obasa-min
Ian, years ago I knew more than you know now about al Qaeda participation, with the aid of the US military, in the war in Bosnia.
IIRC, some of the alleged 9/11 hijackers were involved in that.
Congratulations to the Navy SEALS the CIA and everyone else involved in this operation.
How he was living in a huge mansion near the Pakistani equivalent of West Point, undoubtedly a secure area, is an key question though.
God knows how the Truther idiots will spin this one.
This will spawn a new branch of twooferism. I can envision all sorts of new lines of crackpottery. Sure as the sun rises in the east they'll they the timing of the announcement was to distract from 1) high gas prices, or 2) NATO's apparently errant strike in Lybia,...etc.
At least this is good news for sane people. Snuggy and his ilk will need a few days to refocus and come up with new reasons to hate America.
Ian, years ago I knew more than you know now about al Qaeda participation, with the aid of the US military, in the war in Bosnia.
Of course you do. You're a professor of history specializing in the Balkans.
Oh wait, no, you're an unemployed janitor who lives with your parents.
IIRC, some of the alleged 9/11 hijackers were involved in that.
Yup. IIRC, the Bosniak army was also using modified attack baboons in clear violation of the Geneva Conventions.
Anyway, Brian, you never answered my question, and we all know that Laurie Van Auken cries whenever questions are unanswered, so let me know if you think there was something suspicious about the death of Slobodan Milosevic or whether you accept the offical story of what happened at Srebrenica.
do you think the floozy Jersey trash you call "widows" are upset right now? I bet. After all, even fewer people will pay them any attention now.
The CNN news crawls this morning are saying "9-11 widows: Bin Laden's death brings 'closure'" or something like that. Don't know if these are the same widows, though.
I served 8 months in Bosnia. I think I got you beat.
But this can't be true. Griffin claimed that he was dead long time ago. Since we know DRG is never wrong, they must have gotten the wrong guy. Or something like that.
I would have preferred to see a trial. Main Suspect Dead, Cased Closed is poor practice.
God, that's so western-centric.
Goal post will keep shifting. "Where's Bin Laden" will change to "Why did it take so long?".
I'm sure Dylan Avery's vag is going to get all sandy now. Because after all, Osama was "innocent" right?
The conspiracies have started already. Though let's face it there were some unusual decisions made here. As much as someone thought it would be an excellent wheeze to dump bin Laden's body in the sea it seems like a very bad idea.
http://arthurgoldwag.wordpress.com/2011/05/02/buried-at-sea/
"Main Suspect Dead, Cased Closed is poor practice."
You do know, do you not, that you are quite insane?
"Yes the US let him go in 2001, no question."
You do know, do you not, that you are quite insane?
"IIRC, some of the alleged 9/11 hijackers were involved in that."
You do realize, do you not, that you are quite insane?
Our covert-op went off without a hitch, gentlemen. Today is a great day!
"Though let's face it there were some unusual decisions made here. As much as someone thought it would be an excellent wheeze to dump bin Laden's body in the sea it seems like a very bad idea."
Bullshit - it was a great idea. Better than any other one I've heard of.
Bottom line - you either believe we killed him or you don't. If you do then welcome to reality and enjoy it.
If you don't - fuck you and thanks for the entertainment. You will rant and rave and make asses of yourselves but never really accomplish anything. Sound familiar?
Someone at JREF pointed out that he was found in a $1 million mansions with modern conveniences, not hiding in a cave. In other words, the next time a Truther tries the "people living in caves" bit...
Brian, please explain why the gov't would let the better part of ten years pass before catching their scapegoat, instead of just "finding" him in the middle of a room full of falsified links to Iraq about a month or two into the Afghan War.
Also, even cops shoot people who pose a threat. Osama was armed, fighting back, and refusing to surrender. The soldiers did the right thing.
RGT: It's not 'western-centric'. It's just out-and-out dumb. There was some idiot on JREF asking why they didn't just shoot the gun out of his hand like in the movies.
Oh, the laughing we did.
Bullshit - it was a great idea. Better than any other one I've heard of.
Bottom line - you either believe we killed him or you don't. If you do then welcome to reality and enjoy it.
Yes, you either believe he was killed or you don't but that's got nothing to do with whether or not it was a good decision to dump his body in the sea. We surely want to know what he's been doing this whole time. What his health was like and various other things. We'd surely also want to know who he's been associating with and who (perhaps in the ISI) he's been in contact with. And yet they also burnt down the place he was staying. Was anything taken from the house?
They told me that if I voted for McCain, we’d get a continuation of Bush’s wartime policies. AND THEY WERE RIGHT!
-Instapundit
As much as someone thought it would be an excellent wheeze to dump bin Laden's body in the sea it seems like a very bad idea.
Having a look at what Sharia says about burial, it was really a pretty classy move. Better than he deserved. Not like they're going to extract useful information from his dead corpse anyway.
"624. If it is feared that an enemy may dig up the grave and exhume the dead body and amputate its ears or nose or other limbs, it should be lowered into sea, if possible, as stated in the foregoing rule."
As much as someone thought it would be an excellent wheeze to dump bin Laden's body in the sea it seems like a very bad idea.
Well, what other options did they have? Supposedly no country would take the body. And even if you don't believe that, you can understand why the U.S. didn't want a permanent grave site.
Islamic burial practice requires the body to be treated and buried promptly; if we hadn't done that, there would have been an uproar. (It's interesting that we now treat dead terrorist masterminds with more dignity than we treated living nobodies at the time of Abu Ghraib.)
The viking funeral was probably the best option for disposing of the corpse. And it's kind of a win-win. The U.S. shows its willingness to respect the traditions of even those who murder us. But if you're an American, and you remember the anger of those first few days after 9/11, you have to crack a grin at the mental image of the U.S. military feeding Osama bin Laden to the sharks.
"And yet they also burnt down the place he was staying. Was anything taken from the house?"
More BS - a helo was destroyed.
Burnt down the place - WTF??? Where do you get your info? Brian Good?
"We'd surely also want to know who he's been associating with and who (perhaps in the ISI) he's been in contact with."
I'm sure they purged his rectum for ISI operative before they dumped the piece of shit into the ocean.
What Triterope said. Bury him anywhere on land and it becomes a shrine to his loony followers. Treat the body according to Islamic customs and you can credibly claim (as George W. Bush insisted back in 2001) that we're not at war with Islam.
Was anything taken from the house?
I can't find it now, but I saw articles earlier today that said "yes." They looted the house for anything that might be of intelligence value.
"Pat, I haven't forgotten KSM's tribunal. Marx said: "Military justice is to justice what military music is to music.""
Groucho Marx also said: "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedies"
Which applies too you perfectly.
More BS - a helo was destroyed.
Burnt down the place - WTF??? Where do you get your info? Brian Good?
Fair enough. As is usual there is lots of different information coming out and the full picture isn't completely clear yet.
Anyway, ease back on the caffeine or whatever it is that makes you so feisty on the internet.
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-0502-bin-laden-raid-20110503,0,1186425.story?page=1&utm_medium=feed&track=rss&utm_campaign=Feed%3A%20latimes%2Fmostviewed%20%28L.A.%20Times%20-%20Most%20Viewed%20Stories%29&utm_source=feedburner
"Anyway, ease back on the caffeine or whatever it is that makes you so feisty on the internet."
Years of listening to douchebags like Brian Good telling me what I did or did not do at Tora Bora has made me even feistier than usual.
"Years of listening to douchebags like Brian Good telling me what I did or did not do at Tora Bora has made me even feistier than usual."
Oh Max! It seems I may have fired off a rather angry response to you which has ended up in moderation.
I didn't realize you were in Tora Bora so if the post I wrote sees the light of day then see it in then don't take it too personally.
No problem Angrysoba - it is the one issue BS Good brings up every now and then that makes me realize how little one person can know. It's the centerpiece of his smorgasbord of stupidity.
"Yes the US let him go in 2001, no question"
Of course - why would Rumsfeld and Gen. Franks think that an approach that worked so horibly in the prior two months (i.e. Mazar-i-Sharif, Kandahar and Kabul) not fail again. And why wasn't Brain Good consulted before their decision?
Max, if you have a problem with what people say about Tora Bora, take it up with the Guardian, the Independent, Dalton Fury, the New Yorker, the Christian Science Monitor, Newsweek, and any number of other mainstream news sources that report that the US didn't even try to stop Osama from walking out of Tora Bora.
You also might take it up with Col. David Hunt, who claimed they let Osama go again in 2007.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,304306,00.html
See Brian that's the difference between you and me. You live in a newspaper while I live in reality.
Of course "Dalton Fury" is going to claim "that the US didn't even try to stop Osama from walking out of Tora Bora"
But he claims it was a crappy military decision NOT his bosses intentionally allowing OBL to escape. You don't get that difference because you don't want to. It doesn't fit into your "I hate the US" agenda.
I'm sure Obama is regretting not getting your advice before he decided to dump that piece of shit in the ocean.
Keep entertaining us you little insignificant bug.
Max, you're an anonymous internet poster who doesn't live anywhere. Your claimed credentials have no more validity than would claims that you're a 22YO SWF 36-24-35 who likes balding men.
Dalton Fury says that the brass vetoed every single plan he offered to get bin Laden. You call that crappy decisions. I call that a pattern of behavior.
They let him go.
They let him go.
Where have I heard this before?
BIN LADEN: They let us go. It's the only explanation for the ease of our escape.
COURIER: Easy? You call that easy?
BIN LADEN: They're tracking us.
COURIER: Not this courier, brother.
BIN LADEN: At least the information on that thumb drive is still intact.
COURIER: What's so important? What's he carrying?
BIN LADEN: The technical readouts of the World Trade Center. I only hope that when the data's analyzed a weakness can be found. It's not over yet.
Brian - why don't we meet and I can ram my credentials down your little chicken shit throat?
Sound fair?
So let me make sure I understand... We go with Dalton Fury's ideas (not plans idiot) and we are a military junta. We don't and we are intentionally letting terrorists escape.
WTF dipshit? You should be the anonymous internet poster...
Nicely done, Triterope.
I'm guessing that's another movie Brian has never seen.
pffffft
All Brian can do now is make farting sounds. That's how totally he's been pwn3d by everyone here.
There's Ianane logic for you: It's all he does, therefore it's all he can do.
It's all he does because it's all he need do.
Still trying to pretend that I didn't catch you lying on at least a dozen occasions in the last week alone, goat fucker?
Tell us more about Dr. Sisson--you lying psychopath.
Or better yet, instead of hijacking another thread with the lies and propaganda you spew like a fire hose, why don't you just crawl inside a hole and die.
After all, like Ronald Reagan, they only good thing you'll do in your worthless life is die.
UtterFail, you have never caught me lying. Like Ian you simply repeat and repeat and repeat things that are not true, and you don't provide evidence to support them.
Anyone who reads this blogs knows you're lying, goat fucker. And all you're trying to do now is hijack another thread.
Well fuck you, Pinocchio, because I'm not taking your bait--you scumbag.
Don't you have a troofer to sexually harass?
All you do is repeat your lies, UtterBilge. You don't back up your claims, only repeat them.
Max you have to understand that Brian is an "expert" on SFOD-D, their trainging, tackings, and planning.
In fact he knows more than actual Delta operators do.
The hills around Palo Alto are exactly like the Hindu Kush, which also makes him an expert on mountain warfare. Throw in the fact that there are a lot of Indians and Pakistanis at the building Brian does janitorial work at that he's on the short-list to replace Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State and Gates as Secretary of Defense at the same time.
We should be greatful that we spends time here to share his considerable knowledge with we the unwashed.
There's Ianane logic for you: It's all he does, therefore it's all he can do.
Well, to be fair, you also post endless squealspam in which you call people "girls".
Like Ian you simply repeat and repeat and repeat things that are not true, and you don't provide evidence to support them.
False.
All you do is repeat your lies, UtterBilge. You don't back up your claims, only repeat them.
See what I mean?
MGF. I'm not an expert on Delta Force. I did, however, read an interview with Dalton Fury, so I know what he said. He said that every plan they offered for getting bin Laden was overruled by the brass.
I also know what the Christian Science Monitor said (that the trail to Pakistan crossed a major highway) and what Newsweek said (that only one of the trails out was bombed). And I know that there were more journalists at Tora Bora than there were US soldiers.
From that interview, and those two articles, I know more about Tora Bora than you do.
From that interview, and those two articles, I know more about Tora Bora than you do.
Aw, isn't it cute when Brian acts like he knows things about the war in Afghanistan? It's like when he acts like he understands physics or engineering.
I've taken classes in engineering and physics in college. Maybe you didn't and so you regard them as great mysteries. That would explain why you so credulously accept the bilge that Shyam Sunder tells you.
I've read a few news articles about Tora Bora, which makes me eminently more qualified in the subject matter than anyone else in this forum.
The goat fucker prevaricates, "...All you do is repeat your lies, UtterBilge. You don't back up your claims, only repeat them.
You just can't stop lying, can you, goat fucker? Never mind that I've already ripped you a new asshole in previous threads. Now you want me to repeat the information that proves you're a liar?
Obviously, you're trying to hijack another thread. Well, fuck you, goat fucker.
Never mind that Drs. Biederman and Barnett used the word "eroded" to describe the observed damage to the structural steel, which is in precise agreement with Dr. Sisson. And never mind that Dr. Biederman is the CO-AUTHOR of Dr. Sisson's paper. Thus, your claim that Drs. Biederman and Barnett disagree with Dr. Sisson is another in the long list of lies you've told over the last two years.
You're a joke, goat fucker.
Don't you have a troofer to sexually harass?
The goat fucker whines, "...I've taken classes in engineering and physics in college."
Never mind that you flunked each and every course. And we all know that failed janitors and insane sex stalkers routinely have an engineering background.
Give it up, psychopath.
Don't you have a troofer to sexually harass, goat fucker?
I didn't read an article on Dalton Fury - I read his book. I have also read fifteen other books on US operations in Afghanistan/Pakistan.
Guess what? I do not consider myself an expert on the subject. At best I'm mildly educated on the subject. I work regularly with active duty personel who have done multiple tours in Afghanistan, and I'm still only mildly educated. Afghanistan is a complex place, we conduct operations all over the place, and most of those operations have never been written about outside of Wikileaks.
Speaking of which...Wikileaks says you're full of shit. Anybody here can go to their vast file of leaked classified documents and read the truth - the Afghan warlords suck, we can't trust them, and some pencil-pusher with a Masters in international relations from Texas A&M was way over his head in those early days of OEF.
The books I recommend to everyone here to read are:
"Ghost Wars" - by Steve Coll
"Not a Good Day to Die" - by Sean Naylor.
Jawbreaker, Kill Bin Laden, and Looming Towers are also required reading in my book circle.
I've taken classes in engineering and physics in college.
And didn't learn a thing.
Maybe you didn't and so you regard them as great mysteries. That would explain why you so credulously accept the bilge that Shyam Sunder tells you.
Brian, if you went to college, how come you're an unemployed janitor who lives with his parents?
Oh, right, you spent the whole time sniffing glue and stalking the co-eds until you flunked out.
I've read a few news articles about Tora Bora, which makes me eminently more qualified in the subject matter than anyone else in this forum.
False. You're an ignorant liar, Brian. You're not qualified on any subject manner. You couldn't even mop floors correctly!
This comment has been removed by the author.
UtterFail, you can't "repeat the information that proves you're a liar" because there is no such information.
The fact that Biedermann and Barnett co-wrote a paper with Sisson using the word "eroded" in 2002 has nothing to do with Sisson's loony claims in 2006, and your belief that it does is just another instance of your inability to reason.
I have never flunked a course in engineering or physics. The only course I ever flunked was economics, and that was because I didn't even open the textbook (Samuelson) until three days before the exam.
MGF, the fact that Afghanistan is complicated and the warlords can not be trusted does not change one whit the fact that the US military let Osama get away. A Christian Science Monitor reporter saw one of the warlords' people selling letters of transit to al Qaeda in the lobby of a hotel in Jalalabad. The warlords had already shown themselves to be unreliable before 9/11. Michael Scheuer knew all about it.
Ian, your rhetorical questions would be irrational even if they were fact-based, and they're not.
Lying again, scumbag.
"...Professor Richard Sisson says it did not melt, it eroded. The cause was the very hot fires in the debris after 9/11 that cooked the steel over days and weeks.
Professor Sisson determined that the steel was attacked by a liquid slag which contained iron, sulphur and oxygen.
However, rather than coming from thermite, the metallurgist Professor Sisson thinks the sulphur came from masses of gypsum wallboard that was pulverised and burnt in the fires. He says:
"I don't find it very mysterious at all, that if I have steel in this sort of a high temperature atmosphere that's rich in oxygen and sulphur this would be the kind of result I would expect."" -- Dr. Sisson, 2005
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/conspiracy_files/7434230.stm
And what's this, liar?
"Presented by: Prof. Ronald Biederman, George F. Fuller Professor of Mechanical Engineering
"Abstract
"Several Steel samples from Buildings 7, 1 and 2 of the World Trade Center were collected during the Federal Emergency Management Agency forensic investigation shortly after the September 11, 2001 incident. Macroscopically the steel samples supplied had severe "erosion" with plate thickness varying from 12.7mm to a total loss of metal in many areas. Also, some localized plastic deformation was observed. A determination of the cause of this unexpected erosion and an estimate of the maximum temperature that this steel likely experienced will be present along with a perspective on the implications that this damage may pose for high rise structural steel buildings." -- Drs. Sisson and Biederman.
http://www.georgevandervoort.com/fa_lit_papers/World_Trade_Center.pdf
Thus, we can see, once again, that you're lying and misrepresenting the findings of Drs. Biederman, Barnett and Sisson.
Don't you have a troofer to sexually harass, Pinocchio.
Continued...
In fact you're lying, because the investigation took place at the Worcester Polytechnic Institute under the direction of Drs. Biederman and Sisson. Thus, there is no contradiction, and WE CAN SEE THAT YOU'RE LYING AGAIN.
Don't you have a troofer to sexually harass, goat fucker?
As anyone can see, I always substantiate my argument with facts and direct quotes. And what does the goat fucker give us? He gives us lies, obfuscation, misrepresentation of the scientific evidence and bald-faced lies.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
Grade: F-
Ronald Biederman
http://www.me.wpi.edu/People/Biederman/
Richard D. Sisson, Jr., Ph.D.
http://www.me.wpi.edu/People/Sisson/
Professor Jonathon Barnett
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/jonathan-barnett/5/b02/ba2?goback=.cps_1247149767187_1
Professor Barnett Helps Investigate WTC Collapse
http://www.wpi.edu/academics/Depts/Fire/News/wtc.html
UtterFail, I'm not lying or misrepresenting anything. We already discussed your misrepresentation of the vandervoort paper in the "how stupid" thread and the "land of truthers" thread.
When you are shown to be wrong, you only go repeating the same lies.
The statements of the FEMA Appendix C report contradict Dr. Sisson's claims on the BBC. If you had bothered to read the report you would know that. Nowhere has either Biederman or Barnett endorsed Sisson's silly "Gypsum theory". Jonathan Cole has shown that gypsum baked with steel does not erode it.
The vondervoort paper is about the erosion of the steel. It doesn't say anything about gypsum. It says they reproduced the erosion by use of iron sulfide. They didn't use gypsum. Gypsum (calcium sulfate) won't do that. It's inert.
You're silly. You obviously didn't even read the paper you cite, and it doesn't say what you claim. You simply engage in a whole lot of technobabble. None of the facts you present in any way show that Biederman or Barnett endorsed Sisson's silly claims about gypsum.
You just won't stop lying, will you, goat fucker?
The "Deep Mystery" of Melted Steel
"...There is no indication that any of the fires in the World Trade Center buildings were hot enough to melt the steel framework. Jonathan Barnett, professor of fire protection engineering, has repeatedly reminded the public that steel--which has a melting point of 2,800 degrees Fahrenheit--may weaken and bend, but does not melt during an ordinary office fire. Yet metallurgical studies on WTC steel brought back to WPI reveal that a novel phenomenon--called a eutectic reaction--occurred at the surface, causing intergranular melting capable of turning a solid steel girder into Swiss cheese...Materials science professors Ronald R. Biederman and Richard D. Sisson Jr. confirmed the presence of eutectic formations by examining steel samples under optical and scanning electron microscopes...In the World Trade Center fire, the presence of oxygen, sulfur and heat caused iron oxide and iron sulfide to form at the surface of structural steel members. This liquid slag corroded through intergranular channels into the body of the metal, causing severe erosion and a loss of structural integrity...'The important questions,' says Biederman, 'are how much sulfur do you need, and where did it come from? The answer could be as simple--and this is scary--as acid rain.'"
http://www.wpi.edu/News/Transformations/2002Spring/steel.html
Thus, we can see that there is no contradiction--they all agree on the cause of the erosion--and you're lying again, goat fucker.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
Grade: F-
GutterBall, you lie.
Your endless spam about the erosion of the steel nowhere says that gypsum caused it. Only Dr. Sisson was nuts enough to say that.
The goat fucker continues to lie, "...The vondervoort paper is about the erosion of the steel. It doesn't say anything about gypsum. It says they reproduced the erosion by use of iron sulfide. They didn't use gypsum. Gypsum (calcium sulfate) won't do that."
The professor didn't say anything about "gypsum"--you lying cocksucker. THE BBC said "gypsum," which is an error on the part of the BBC, not the professor.
Here's what the professor said--sans your misrepresentation of his explanation:
"I don't find it very mysterious at all, that if I have steel in this sort of a high temperature atmosphere that's rich in oxygen and sulphur this would be thect kind of result I would expe."" -- Dr. Sisson, 2005
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/conspiracy_files/7434230.stm
Here's more proof that you're misrepresenting the scientific evidence and the professor's explanation.
"...This liquid slag corroded through intergranular channels into the body of the metal, causing severe erosion and a loss of structural integrity...'The important questions,' says Biederman, 'are how much sulfur do you need, and where did it come from? The answer could be as simple--and this is scary--as acid rain.'"" -- Dr. Beiderman
Thus, we can see that there is no contradiction--they all agree on the cause of the erosion--and you're lying again, goat fucker. "Gypsum" was never mentioned by the professors.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
Grade: F-
Squirm, goat fucker, squirm--you lying weasel.
BBC says: "Professor Sisson thinks the sulphur came from masses of gypsum wallboard that was pulverised and burnt in the fires."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/conspiracy_files/7434230.stm
Neither Barnett or Biederman ever corroborated the gypsum claim.
Can you see what the goat fucker is up to, folks?
Answer: He's resorting to another logical fallacy in a thoroughly underhanded attempt to win the "debate."
Notice that the psychopath deliberately pretends that professor Sisson made the claim that "gypsum" was responsible for the eutectic reaction that resulted in erosion, when, if fact, the professor never made such a claim.
So which logical fallacy did the goat fucker employ in order to misrepresent the scientific evidence?
Answer: Straw man argument.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
Thus, we can see, once again, that the goat fucker is a psychopath who will go to any length in order to lie, obfuscate, misrepresent the data and fake the evidence.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
Grade: F-
Squirm, goat fucker, squirm--you lying weasel.
GutterBall, BBC says Sisson made the claim.
"Professor Sisson thinks the sulphur came from masses of gypsum wallboard that was pulverised and burnt in the fires."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/conspiracy_files/7434230.stm
You haven't shown that he didn't, but only offered your evidence-free opinion to that effect.
That's the good old fashioned bare assertion fallacy.
The goat fucker continues to lie, "...Neither Barnett or Biederman ever corroborated the gypsum claim.
Get it through your thick skull, liar. The claim that gypsum was responsible for the erosion was made by the BBC, not Dr. Sisson.
Notice that the goat fucker is trying to pull a fast one and pretend that the BBC's remarks are Dr. Sisson's remarks. He's so arrogant that he thinks you can't see the flow of the quotation marks in the BBC article. Also notice that he can't show you an actual quote from Dr. Sisson where he allegedly claims "gypsum" was responsible for the erosion.
Thus, we can see, once again, that the goat fucker is a psychopath who will go to any length in order to lie, obfuscate, misrepresent the data and fake the evidence.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
Grade: F-
Squirm, goat fucker, squirm--you lying weasel.
The goat fucker continues to lie and play games, "...You haven't shown that he didn't, but only offered your evidence-free opinion to that effect."
Logical fallacy: Prove a negative.
On the contrary, goat fucker, YOU SHOW ME WHERE DR. SISSON MADE THE CLAIM.
Stuffing the BBC's misstatement down the professor's throat is nothing more than a cheap, dirty straw man argument.
Thus, we can see, once again, that the goat fucker is a psychopath who will go to any length in order to lie, obfuscate, misrepresent the data and fake the evidence.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
Grade: F-
Squirm, goat fucker, squirm--you lying weasel.
UtterFail, BBC attributes to Dr. Sisson the belief that gypsum eroded the steel.
If you have evidence that he does not believe that, please provide it.
You incompetence and verbosity make for a stupefying combination.
I already have provided the evidence --you stupid cocksucker. And I provided the links, as well. The fact remains that you can't provide a direct quote the shows Dr. Sisson, or anyone else, ever made the claim that "gypsum" was responsible for the erosion.
On the contrary, goat fucker, YOU SHOW ME WHERE DR. SISSON MADE THE CLAIM. NOT SOME BBC MISQUOTE.
Put up, or shut up, goat fucker.
Give me a DIRECT QUOTE FROM DR. SISSON, or stop lying--you God damned psychopath.
Thus, we can see, once again, that the goat fucker is a psychopath who will go to any length in order to lie, obfuscate, misrepresent the data and fake the evidence.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
Grade: F-
Squirm, goat fucker, squirm--you lying weasel.
I'm waiting pateintly, goat fucker.
Where are the direct quotes from Drs. Sisson, Beiderman or Barnett that support the lie that they argued "Gypsum" is responsible for the erosion. And a BBC misquote DOESN'T QUALIFY AS EVIDENCE.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
Grade: F-
Squirm, goat fucker, squirm--you lying weasel.
UtterFail, BBC says: "Professor Sisson thinks the sulphur came from masses of gypsum wallboard."
You have provided no evidence for your claim that it's a misquote.
You live in a fantasy world--a boring, dysfunctional fantasy world.
"...You have provided no evidence for your claim that it's a misquote. "
Yes, I have.
I gave you direct quotes and links that prove they never mentioned "gypsum."
For example,
"...This liquid slag corroded through intergranular channels into the body of the metal, causing severe erosion and a loss of structural integrity...'The important questions,' says Biederman, 'are how much sulfur do you need, and where did it come from? The answer could be as simple--and this is scary--as acid rain.'"" -- Dr. Beiderman
"I don't find it very mysterious at all, that if I have steel in this sort of a high temperature atmosphere that's rich in oxygen and sulphur this would be the kind of result I would expect."" -- Dr. Sisson, 2005
Put up, or shut up, goat fucker.
Give me a DIRECT QUOTE FROM DR. SISSON, or stop lying--you God damned psychopath.
Thus, we can see, once again, that the goat fucker is a psychopath who will go to any length in order to lie, obfuscate, misrepresent the data and fake the evidence.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
Grade: F-
Squirm, goat fucker, squirm--you lying weasel.
Now, put up or shut up, goat fucker.
FAILURE TO PRODUCE DIRECT QUOTES FROM DRS. SISSON, BEIDERMAN AND BARNETT THAT PROVE THEY EVER MADE THE CLAIM THAT GYPSUM WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE EROSION WILL RESULT IN AUTOMATIC FORFEIT OF THE DEBATE. AND BBC MISQUOTES DON'T COUNT AS "EVIDENCE."
Now stop stonewalling and produce the evidence to support your lies, or fuck off.
Squirm, goat fucker, squirm--you lying weasel.
UtterFail, you are incompetent. A 2002 paper has nothing to do with whether someone said something stupid in 2008.
LET THE RECORD SHOW THAT THE GOAT FUCKER CANNOT SUPPORT HIS FALACIOUS CLAIM THAT DRS. SISSON, BEIDERMAN AND BARNETT ARGUED "GYPSUM" WAS THE CAUSE OF THE EROSION.
THUS, YOU FORFIET THE DEBATE AGAIN.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
Grade: F-
So tell us, goat fucker, how does it feel the know that your alleged "credibility," once again, can be measured in negative engineering units?
Now, get out of here--you insane liar.
I never made such a claim, UtterFool.
Bullshit! You made the claim in the following post:
http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2011/05/steven-jones-latest-research.html#c4210813949307682573
Not only did you lie, you contradicted yourself again, which proves that you're an insane liar who will say anything.
There's a reason why you never finished school--they expelled you for intellectual dishonesty, and I'm willing to bet they caught you cheating as well. Your behavior proves beyond a doubt that you're not high school material, let a alone capable of finishing university. You're a pig--scum of the earth.
Once again, you FAIL, goat fucker.
Grade: F-
So tell us, goat fucker, how does it feel the know that your alleged "credibility," once again, can be measured in negative engineering units?
Now, get out of here--you insane liar.
UtterFail, I never made the claim you attribute to me.
You seem to be English-challenged. Would you rather have this discussion in some other language?
Klingon, perhaps?
This comment has been removed by the author.
Right here--you filthy liar:
"...UtterFail, BBC says "Professor Sisson thinks the sulphur came from masses of gypsum wallboard"."
The goat fucker contradicts himself and lies again.
Now, let's talk about something you really understand, goat molester: Sex stalking.
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!.
"...Bay Area 9/11 Truth Trivia Quiz:
Q: Who is Brian Good?
A: A sexually-frustrated wacko who, in his late 50s, still lives in his parents' basement in Palo Alto.
B. A bisexual stalker who targets famous 9/11 activists of both the female and male persuasions.
C. A coward who spends 18 hours a day hiding behind a keyboard and cyber-stalking the targets of his obsessions under a long list of pseudonyms, but is afraid to debate them live or on the radio.
D. All of the above."
Don't you have a troofer to sexually harass, goat fucker?
UtterFail, thanks for demonstrating yet again your incompetence.
By resorting to the desperate ad hominem fantasies of the bigot, liar, and lunatic Kevin Barrett, you show your inability to muster facts to support your claims.
I have never flunked a course in engineering or physics. The only course I ever flunked was economics, and that was because I didn't even open the textbook (Samuelson) until three days before the exam.
Brian, it's amusing that you try to convince us that you've actually been to college. It's like Donald Trump trying to convince people that he's a successful businessman.
Ian, your rhetorical questions would be irrational even if they were fact-based, and they're not.
So you can't explain why you're an unemployed janitor living with your parents if you went to college, huh?
I can explain. You obviously never went to college. You're too stupid and ignorant to have been to college.
Ian, your assumptions about the facts are erroneous and irrational, and your logic is faulty and would still be faulty even if your assumptions were correct--which they're not.
Sweet Jesus, that song is terrible.
Ian, your assumptions about the facts are erroneous and irrational, and your logic is faulty and would still be faulty even if your assumptions were correct--which they're not.
Poor Brian, he's been so badly pwn3d that all he can do is babble the same dumbspam over and over again. He uses big words in another hilariously bad attempt to make himself look smart too.
Ian, words like "assumptions" and "erroneous" and "irrational" may be big to you, but people who like to discuss ideas (as opposed to gossip about people) find them much more convenient than the heap of little words they obviate.
Post a Comment
<< Home