I have often been accused by leftists of "painting them with a broad brush." I do do this in fact. My theory is that they deserve it for not distancing themselves from the kooks, and in many cases giving them first-rate credibility, a la Cindy Sheehan, Michael Moore, etc.

Consider the right in contradistinction. The nutcases promptly get booted and or marginalized. One could only wish the left would emulate this practice. Why do they not? Could it be because the kooks are already in charge?

This is the scandal that just keeps giving and is becoming more mainstream.

In the link below, wtc7 is clearly stable yet the announcers "know" it's going to collapse. The pulled(!) BBC feed reported it as fallen while it still stood in the background. The "sudden collapse" story gives way, day by day, to the original reportage of Day 1, that the owner had wtc7 "pulled".

Oh, and Marc Cuban making the MSM's heads explode last week! Priceless!

http://wonkette.com/politics/wtc/bbc-cnn-employ-magical-psychic-news-announcers-240564.php

Bryan hears Twilight Zone music.

"He says that to give Patrick a pass for not censoring the page is not fair."

Surely you know the difference between censorship (an official government ban on free speech) and editing.

Wasn't bryanD also the kook that was posting the 'Moon Landing Hoax' comments ?

The question is when will the Democrats get really bold and have Congressional hearings on this. It be interesting to see Buzz Aldrin respond to Harry Reid.

I think the word can be used either way.

When someone cries, "this is censorship!" they're usually trying to claim some right not to be silenced in that particular place. But private individuals and businesses have every right to control the speech allowed to be associated with them. Censorship only violates a persons Rights when it's done by the government and the if government can't claim a compelling interest (such as yelling "fire" in a theatre or "bomb" in an airport, or slander or fraud or libel or perjury).

But if I delete comments on my blog I'm certainly practicing censorship. The difference is that it violates no one's rights since they never had the right to comment on my blog, only an invitation to do so.

I think the 'Truthers' should get all the press and attention they want. The sooner the American public wake up and see what the many conspiracies the 'Truthers' believe, the better.

bryanDirtbag visits "area 51 each day.

I have often been accused by leftists of "painting them with a broad brush." I do do this in fact. My theory is that they deserve it for not distancing themselves from the kooks

You get an "Amen brother" from me on that one.

It was the people at MoveOn that claimed they "Owned" the Democratic Party, yet if you read that site it is full throttle moonbat.

And yet they are placated to constantly by Democrats, although I do find it humorous they are being attacked for not going for the complete and absolute "cut off funding" at this juncture.

This is a desperate time for the left. They have invested everything into defeat from the word "GO" in Iraq.

When polled they even "wish" for defeat.

FOX News/Opinion Dynamics Poll

19. Do you personally want the Iraq plan President Bush announced last week to succeed?

34% of Democrats polled "NO"

That tells you something right there.

I really thought the kook fringe would break off into some sort of "Green Party" but Democrats need their support so bad that they are willing to encourage terrorists with accolades of being "freedom fighters" and denigrating the President that sent troops in to defeat them. (Yes it's true......when a terrorist or Democrat speaks, you never know the source unless someone points it out)

Since no one is distancing themselves from the "kooks", then I have no problem lumping the entire Democratic Party into that category.

kat,
cover-ups can't stand the light. Pop Mechanics has even degraded their own web "investigation" of the matter. Their overhead schematics of the buildings in which they omitted the central support beams have been deleted.

WITH the 42 central support beams included, the exterior building frame failure (straight down) they posited, was no longer tenable. The empty basket structure picture they tried to draw was too absurd; the design was more like a screen of mutually supporting crossbeams.

And the 9 web pages are only halfpages and the hyperlinks are just Brietbart-style pop-ups barely related to the subject, if at all. A poor showing with some straw men thrown in as filler.

Mike, "Did We Go To the Moon"? Fun show from FOX with 2 or 3 very compelling facts (photographically): No dust on the feet of the landing gear and no ground clearing from the thrust/heat of the landing jets; anomolous light sources; duplicate photos with different middle grounds superimposed; the Eagle Lander chassis was never successfully tested on earth but worked perfectly on the moon; the bouncy moonwalk appeared as 100% normal earthwalk with film at higher speed, ditto the Rover; and so on. And that pesky Van Allen Radiation Belt.
RECOMMENDED, Draw your own conclusions (pulled from Google, though.)

jhow: See you tomorrow!

bryanD gives meaning to the phrase "violently retarded".

Woohoo! All bryanD needs to do now to score a trifecta is defend the Biblical Flat Earth theory.

bryanDirtbag sounds just like my brother-in-law and he made it all the way to third grade.

At the risk of seeming obtuse (having, I thought, sufficient exposure to bryanD to appreciate his far-outedness), I really thought until his 6:67 post that he was acknowledging the looniness of the theory in his 3:49 post.

But now I feel, well, duped.

psst. bryan: 666 West 6th, 6th handle on the left. It's all there.

Pop Mechanics has even degraded their own web "investigation" of the matter. Their overhead schematics of the buildings in which they omitted the central support beams have been deleted

Nut-uh....really?

The only thing that baffled me was how did they "remote control" the planes into the buildings. I bet Popular Mechanics has a chapter on that that I missed.

Oh, and those 19 hijackers. Too many questions...head ready to explode....must put out with beer....(Corona to be precise)

Ahhhhhhhhhhh.....much better.

Carry on............

I know this is OT, but it fits well with the title of this post...

Did anyone catch Biden's opening statement in the "Attourney firings" hearings? If you didn't you can google it, but I'll paraphrase:

In a democrat controlled congress the standard is you are guilty unless you can prove yourself innocent.

Typical...

bryanD[elusional]

RECOMMENDED, Draw your own conclusions (pulled from Google, though.)

Ok my "conclusion" is the Lunar Laser Ranging Experiment left on the moon by Apollo 11 doesn't actually "ping the moon with laser pulses and measure the Earth-moon distance very precisely" and is still used 35 years later by University of Maryland physics professors.

The Lunar Laser Ranging Experiment actually "pings" off of Karl Rove's chrome dome and measures the distance between Rove and the truth.

As for WTC 7... well could be. After all, the truthers claim no building has EVER collapsed as it did.

On the other hand they are so devoid of brain cells they have zero ability to tune in even the most basic of cable service that might provide proof it CAN happen.

And BTW... the Earth IS FLAT!

This nonsense is precisely why I've never believed that "America coming together" meme right after 9/11. Or the squandering of goodwill from the rest of the world, since people who live here have the irrational belief we did it to ourselves.

That's it, BryanD has convinced me.
I'm not voting for George Bush in '08.

bryand: "cover-ups can't stand the light. Pop Mechanics has even degraded their own web "investigation" of the matter. Their overhead schematics of the buildings in which they omitted the central support beams have been deleted."

False.

Popular Mechanics has an editorial out online right now (and from this month) which reiterates and reaffirms ALL of the analysis done by the real experts in all the relevant science disciplines.

I'm not surprised that bryand has mischaracterized/lied (AGAIN!) about one of his "references".

Why, just yesterday, bryand was kind enough to provide 2 (yes 2!) links which he claimed backed up his assertions.

Needless to say, both links, and lefty sites to boot, CONTRADICTED what bryand was saying!!

Precious.

Simply precious.

Oh, by the way, one of the sites was an article in Pravda!

Pitch perfect.

But....but... remember. Always remember fire has never melted steel and that it defies physics for the World Trade Center Tower Seven, building seven, which collapsed in on itself, it is impossible for a building to fall the way it fell without explosives being involved..

Where's barneyRUBBLE? I'm sure he buy into the crapola no matter how demented it is.

"he's hosting some of the dumbest, most paranoid, most downright infuriating crap in existence today"

You mean, he knows BarneyGoogle, Lee, and our assorted lunatics? Wow, have fun boys.

OT, but...HEH.

http://right-thinking.com/index.php/weblog/anyone_done_the_old_stiffy_joke_yet/

MikeD typed:
"All bryanD needs to do now to score a trifecta is defend the Biblical Flat Earth theory"

The Bible doesn't say the earth is flat. In fact, in Isaiah it says God sits on the "circle of the earth". In Job, earth's transit is described.

The flat earth doctrine was promoted by the Roman Catholic church and is 100% un-Biblical.

marc, (I'm not NECCESSARILY a proponent of a moonlanding hoax, BUT) A spacecraft went to the moon in 1969 (it was tracked by HAM radio operators), but was it MANNED?

That Van Allen radiation belt does a lot to explain why moon missions aren't done today, and why we haven't built an outpost there. And , yes I've read NASA types differentiation of radiant vs direct microwaves in the spacecraft. But the thing was thin guage metal which absorbs radiation which would keep reflecting inside the craft. If they didn't cook then, they would have exhibited some sickness. As it is, they've all been long-lived. Plus, NASA has announced, due to the "why-not factor", that the next mission will be 2020-something? Or 2040-something? (Look it up)
So much for scientific progress! FISHY.

Liberals continue to embarrass themselves everyday.

Yeeehaw!

Fishy bryanDirtbag? Naaa just your brain "cell" floating by your nose.

wavemaker typed: "bryan: 666 West 6th, 6th handle on the left. It's all there"

6th seal, 6th bowl, 6th trump signifies a MAN. To know the MYSTERY, you must beg before 10 pm, cause I'm going to bed (and no, it's not King Juan Carlos)

Note to bryanD:

The various apollo missions left a series of retroreflectors on the surface of the moon that astronomers use to gauge the distance between the moon and the earth. How precisely could we place mirrors on the moon without actually landing on it?

Taltos, just remove the tin foil hat from any lefie and you'll have a direct link to the moon. They can travel there and back faster than the speed of light. Ask them, they all travel a round trip every day. They still have Hitler hid out in South America breeding the super human to take over the world don't you know. Some perfect examples of 'what Hitler' was determined to get rid of post comments on here daily. Brain dead lefties.

Ya know what I love about both the Moon Landing Hoax and the 9/11 truther conspiracy nutjobs?

Their cute naive belief that such an operation could possibly be pulled off. The logistics involved are simply staggering with thousands of people actively involved and no one talking? The same government that can't account for the physical location of M1A1 Abrams tanks organized enough to coverup 9/11 is pure and unadulterated horsepucky.

As for wether the Apollo misions were manned or not, I will defer to Jim Lovell(sp?) who I have had the distinct pleasure of meeting in real life, he was certainly convinced (and convincing) that he was there for Apollo 13.

It's funny that the 9/11 Conspiracy nuts don't seem to quite get that metal can WEAKEN long before it MELTS. Intense heat WEAKENS steel and that REDUCES its ability to hold weight which CAUSES collapse.
-=Mike

For the Benefit of BryanD via the PatriotPost:

The Pathology of the Left: In effect, adherents to conspiracy theories are so insecure in their person that they can't handle the truth. Thus, they become fanatical devotees of "alternate realities," about which they believe they possess special knowledge and insight, which, in turn, creates a comfort zone for them.

It's nothing but recycled gnosticism, yet it is proving to be very dangerous and infectious.

Fact is, the ONLY reason guys like Bryan believe that 9/11 was a conspiracy is because they hate Bush with an irrational level of rage.
-=Mike

Yeah, I can't imagine having to hang out with some nutjob like a BryanD, can you?

Remember that Nathan Thurm character from Saturday Night Live? It would be like that; incredibly neurotic, paranoid, disjointed.

Probably drinks non-alcoholic beer, too.

bD, I think you missed the part where the CNN announcer repeatedly says the building is on fire and MAY collapse. Then there a repeated scenes showing fierce billowing of smoke from the base of the building, demonstrating an inferno. Yet you want to focus on a brief mispeaking at the beginning of the segment? C'mon, boy, you are better than that.

Also, buildings fall straight down in a controlled demolition and any situation in which gravity alone acts. What was the supposed side forces on any of these buildings?
==============================

The conspiracy buffs all wonder why the loose change went poof. Maybe it vaporized. Where there's smoke, there's heat, and with the collapse there was pressure, possibly enough to vaporize heavy metals. I wonder if public health has looked at heavy metal poisoning for evidence one way or the other. That evidence should still be present.
=========================================