Combs Spouts Off

"It's my opinion and it's very true."

  • Calendar

    August 2020
    S M T W T F S
     1
    2345678
    9101112131415
    16171819202122
    23242526272829
    3031  
  • Recent Posts

  • Tag Cloud

  • Archives

Posts Tagged ‘911 conspiracy theory’

Democrat candidate and caucus leader is 9/11 Truther

Posted by Richard on July 15, 2012

The Democratic Party is home to a number of Jew-hating 9/11 conspiracy theorists. This one is a state-wide candidate and has a national leadership role (emphasis added):

During a radio interview today, M.D. Alam, a Democrat activist running for Missouri secretary of state, defended his reported claim that 9/11 was a Jewish holiday and his questioning of why no Jews were killed in the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

Sept. 11, 2001, however, was not a Jewish holiday, and estimates conclude at least 200 to 400 Jews, including five Israelis, died in the World Trade Center attacks.

In the interview, Alam also defended “Loose Change,” a series of online videos arguing the 9/11 attacks were planned and conducted by elements within the U.S. government.

Alam is national chairman of the Democratic Party Asian American Caucus and is founder of Missouri’s Democratic Party Asian American Caucus. He was a manager in Missouri for Barack Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign.

Alam was speaking today on “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio” on New York’s WABC Radio.

WND has the audio of the interview.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Has the world gone mad? Or only academia?

Posted by Richard on July 11, 2006

Speaking of moonbats, LGF posted a chunk of the press release from the University of Wisconsin-Madison explaining why Kevin Barrett would be teaching an introductory class on Islam. Barrett, a convert to Islam, believes that al-Qaeda is a CIA front and that the Bush administration blew up the World Trade Center towers. The UW-Madison Provost decided to let this whack job teach his theories to young skulls full of mush in order to defend free speech (emphasis added by LGF):

Farrell notes that a broader issue at play in the Barrett case is the UW-Madison’s long tradition of protecting classroom expression and encouraging students’ critical thinking by allowing analysis of even the most controversial ideas.

“We cannot allow political pressure from critics of unpopular ideas to inhibit the free exchange of ideas. That classroom interaction is central to this university’s mission and to the expansion of knowledge. Silencing that exchange now would only open the door to more onerous and sweeping restrictions,” he says.

“It is in cases like this – difficult cases involving unconventional ideas – that we define our principles and determine our future,” Farrell adds. “Instead of restricting politically unpopular speech, we will take our cue from the bronze plaque in front of Bascom Hall that calls for the ‘continual and fearless sifting and winnowing’ of ideas.”

I saw part of an interview with Barrett on Fox News earlier. He struck me as a committed Islamofascist (Wahhabi or Salafist), not just a tin-foil-hat nutjob like Spooked. Of course, I could be wrong. Heck, Spooked is a pseudonym — Kevin Barrett could be Spooked!

I want to ask UW-Madison Provost Patrick Farrell how he plans to promote free speech, explore "even the most controversial ideas," and stick it to "the man" next: A class on World War II and Nazi Germany taught by a Holocaust denier? A course covering the Civil Rights movement taught by a Klansman?
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

More moonbat science

Posted by Richard on July 10, 2006

Moonbat science marches on! Saturday, I posted about a couple of  "experiments" conducted by 9/11 conspiracy theorist Spooked to "prove" that airplanes didn’t bring down the WTC towers. The intrepid Instapinch, who brought those experiments to public attention, dove back into the depths of Spooked’s site and found yet another amazing experiment regarding the WTC towers. Plus an analysis of United Flight 93’s crash using pencil sketches to prove that:

None of it makes a lot of sense, but the clear thing is that THE OFFICIAL FLIGHT 93 CRASH STORY IS WRONG!

You can check out the WTC experiment at Instapinch. This experiment predates the more sophisticated — I’m not kidding — rabbit fence and concrete block model. Did I mention that this one involves coat hangers?

But don’t settle for Instapinch’s teaser about the Flight 93 theory, go read the whole thing — not for Spooked’s analysis, but for the many wonderful comments. Priceless! I laughed until tears ran down my cheeks. Here are a few samples:

Anonymous said…

and despite his "genius" at fooling the world on 9/11, Bush still couldn’t figure out a way to fake WMD stockpiles in Iraq. Go figure.

Anonymous said…

This is satire, right. Please, let it be satire. Otherwise, you need some serious help and it scares me that you’re walking around unsupervised.

Anonymous said…

I saw Condi Rice in the pilot’s cabin on that flight. She deliberately flew the plane into the ground. At the last second she leaped out of the window with a parachute. The word "Haliburton" was stenciled on the ‘chute.

Anonymous said…

The "Condi Rice in a Haliburton parachute" theory has been completely discredited.

We now know that after shooting Lee Harvey Oswald, Jack Ruby was cryogenically frozen, cloned, and stored in Rumsefeld’s basement until being thawed out and used to fly the planes into the WTC, etc. If you want I can draw you a picture.

Johnny Drama said…

I’ve only one question.

Is this sort of stupidity the result of public school or lead-based paint chips?

Anonymous said…

Liberal…
its not what it used to be

John from WuzzaDem said…

Hopefully, My Last Analysis of the Flight 93 Crash

I think I speak for everyone when I say:

"Please please please please post just one more!"

(Note: The Instapinch post has some pretty good comments, too.)

The humor value of this stuff is undeniable. But, as Instapinch noted, there’s another reason to link to such material:

Without beating a dead horse here …, this sort of idiocy needs to see the light of day. It needs to see that light to show people how unhinged – how simply out of touch with the real world some of the lefty-whack jobs are. Reason and common sense are not given a back seat in these people’s worlds, they are strapped into an ejection seat and are *gone*.

It’s not just Spooked and all the total whack jobs that he shares links and ideas with. A significant portion of the left, while not True Believers, are sympathetic to the conspiracy theorists and/or "agnostic" about who brought down the WTC towers. At the DailyKos comment that Instapinch linked, Socratic joined the laughter and took a bit of a swipe at DU. But Carolita immediately came to DU’s defense:

Don’t you think the 101 comments refuting this "experiment" constitute an adequate response? Unlike the right-wing blogs, DU doesn’t rewrite history and selectively remove a post from 2005 "just in case" some wingnut might see it. And it is hardly any surpise that instapinch.com would selectively point to a posted comment as if it were an official position of the web site and conveniently forget that a multitude of commentors wrote in to refute it.

Well, each of those three sentences is bogus. First, DU removes posts all the time (it’s not secretive; they’re marked "Message removed by moderator"), including several in the Spooked experiment thread. Second, the 101 comments at the time Carolita wrote (it’s now over 280) were absolutely not all refuting the experiment. I don’t think even half of them were negative (note: there were far fewer than a hundred commenters because there was much "dialog"). There certainly wasn’t a "multitude" refuting it. Some commenters were supportive of a 9/11 conspiracy; some were "open-minded"; some were skeptical of Spooked’s experiment, but in a friendly way. I remember at least one commenter praised Spooked for trying so hard and encouraged him to refine his experiment further — I pegged that one as a schoolteacher.

Only a couple or three commenters (before the recent flood of non-DU sightseers) completely rejected the notion of a 9/11 conspiracy and ridiculed Spooked’s experiment. And they had to fend off repeated attacks and challenges from an equal number of hard-core supporters.

Across a wide swath of the American Left extending deep into the Democratic base, the question of who’s responsible for the 9/11 attacks — al-Qaeda, the U.S. government, or Israel — is open to debate.

All this "moonbat science" is pretty damned funny. But it’s also sad. And a bit disturbing, when you think about it.

UPDATE: Moonbats rule in academia.
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments »

Science from the reality-based community

Posted by Richard on July 9, 2006

I haven’t laughed so much in a long time. It all began Friday with LGF’s Hilarious Lefty Post of the Day, which linked to this post at Democratic Underground:

Can a jet fuel/hydrocarbon fire collapse a steel structure? An experiment.

The post is from last October (I’m not sure what prompted Charles to link to it now; maybe he just came across it). If you’d rather not visit DU, you can read the whole thing, plus some fine introductory and concluding remarks, at Instapinch.

The poster, spooked911, is apparently a regular at DU with over 1000 posts. His "experiment" (fully documented with a series of photographs) consisted of:

  • Making a "model" from rabbit fencing and concrete blocks.
  • Simulating "airplane damage" by cutting some of the "support columns" in the rabbit fencing with wire cutters.
  • Lighting kerosene-soaked newspapers inside this "steel structure" and letting it burn for 20 minutes.
  • Observing that the heat didn’t weaken the "steel structure" (rabbit-fencing) of his "building."

Ipso facto — proof that burning jet fuel couldn’t have caused the collapse of the WTC towers!

Here’s his "steel structure" during the "experiment":

Now, that’s pretty damned funny. But wait! It gets even better! The aforementioned Instapinch referenced an earlier post of his in which we learn that this Spooked fella has his own blog with yet more experiments (these are from April 2006):

His particular belief is that no aircraft hit the World Trade Center Towers because there was no aircraft wreckage *outside* the building…or the aircraft should have bounced off….or the aircraft should have passed all the way thru, unscathed. ..or whatever.

So, he devised an experiment to prove beyond the shadow of any doubt that there was no way possible, scientifically proven, mind you, that 767 aircraft flew into the WTC.

I can’t do it justice by explaining it here….go have a read (this one first and then this one) and see the light, brothers and sisters!

Well, I’ll give you a taste of the first one, Wings Break Off:

I set up an experiment testing how a plane might break up upon impacting arrayed steel columns like the WTC wall. The plane and the columns were both constructed of similar pieces of wood (which here favors the plane, since in real life, aluminum is weaker than steel). …

I pushed the plane forcefully into the "wall", and while the fuselage penetrated the wall after reasonably strong force was applied, the wings broke off at the root where the wings met the plane. … A few "columns" broke where the fuselage went in, and a couple broke on either side of the fuselage hole, where the wings broke off– but basically the array of columns were much stronger than the long wings.

This means of course, that no 767 hit either WTC tower.

That’s pretty damned funny, too. But you really need to check out Wings Break Off (and the follow-up, Stronger Wings) for the comments! They are priceless! Here’s one of my favorites:

Anonymous said…

If we assume 9/11 was a massive psy-ops campaign, then we can assume that nothing about 9/11 is really as it seems.

If we assume you are actually a 12 point buck, we can legally shoot you in the chest with a shotgun and mount your head on our living room wall.

What a moron.

Lots more along the same lines. Believe me, you’ll laugh your ass off.

UPDATE: As for the darker side of moonbattery — if you haven’t already read about Jeff Goldstein’s problem with the psychology prof (soon to be unemployed) who gradually went completely psycho online and threatened his kid, check out this post for starters. Assuming he’s back for good — the site’s been mostly down for a couple of days due to DoS attacks. Coincidence?
 
UPDATE 2: More moonbat science!

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Colorado LP jumps the shark

Posted by Richard on April 7, 2006

I was going through the past few days’ mail tonight, and there was the March Colorado Liberty. On page 5, I noticed an ad for a Denver event on March 31 — hmm, bad timing on somebody’s part — called Critical Analysis: 9-11. Well, shucks, I missed it. So I didn’t get to hear Morgan Reynolds of LewRockwell.com and Don Paul of physics911.net present evidence that:

  • Airliners weren’t hijacked and flown into buildings on 9/11, and the government faked all those cell phone calls from people on the planes.
  • Autopsies (!) proved there were no Arabs on Flight 77 (you know — the plane that wasn’t hijacked and didn’t fly into the Pentagon).
  • The WTC towers were destroyed by professional demolition involving scores of people precisely placing thousands of explosive charges over a period of weeks.
  • Guiliani was in on it.
  • So were the CIA, MI6, Mossad, Bush, Cheney, the NY Port Authority, the Rockefeller family, international bankers and financiers, the handful of plutocrats who control all the oil and defense industry corporations — I could go on, but what’s the point?

Really, you ought to visit the Critical Analysis: 9-11 web site. Notice that they’re proud to have Ed Asner and Charlie Sheen on their side. Click some of the links they provide for additional information about the 9/11 conspiracy. You’ll discover more fascinating facts: Britain’s MI6 secretly controls and funds al Qaeda, the captured Saddam is a fake, the London bombings were staged by the Blair government, …

Then ponder this: Critical Analysis: 9-11 is a project organized and financed by Rand Fanshier and some of his Libertarian friends. Rand had a column in the Colorado Liberty adjacent to the ad. In it, he described how he became convinced there was a conspiracy:

Then I did the math. An elementary momentum analysis, using a spreadsheet and data and formulas I checked and double-checked with my own hand, proved beyond any doubt that the WTC towers could not have fallen by damage or fires alone—that they were demolished. The implications were obvious; regardless of how implausible, some alphabet agencies—or people in their employ—at the Federal, State and local levels actually were instrumental in the murders of all those people and the destruction of so much property.

But I have continued doing my job in the LP here at the state level, for years, pushing back here in Colorado at the misuse of government power in so many little ways. All the time also pushing back in my mind the reality that these little things make no difference in a country that has essentially just had a coup d’etat, where the leadership doesn’t protect the people but kills them for geo-political utility.

So, despite the hopelessness of it all, Rand’s still doing his job for the Colorado Libertarian Party. What is his job? Why, he’s on the Board of Directors. In fact, he’s the Outreach Director.

Ponder the irony of that for a moment. To promote the LP among the vast horde of Republican, Democratic, and independent Coloradans, to convince them to take the LP seriously and not dismiss us as fringe kooks, to persuade them to consider becoming Libertarians, the Colorado LP relies on Rand "there were no Muslim terrorists, Bush/Cheney did it" Fanshier.

I believe this is compelling evidence that the Colorado Libertarian Party has jumped the shark (definition 3).

UPDATE: Check out also Libercontrarian’s excellent remarks on this subject, which predate mine by 6 days. Apparently, Nick’s Colorado Liberty was delivered earlier than mine, and he read it right away. He’s already officially left the LP.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | 7 Comments »

Dems hold mock impeachment, blame Jews

Posted by Richard on June 17, 2005

If it isn’t already clear to you that the Democratic Party has been taken over by rabid, hate-filled, conspiracy-theorist, Jew-bashing lunatics, take a look at this Washington Post story quoted at Little Green Footballs

A couple of dozen Democratic members of the House held a mock Judiciary Committee hearing conducting a make-believe impeachment inquiry. Unsurprisingly, all the "witnesses" agreed that the President was guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors regarding the war in Iraq.

But here’s the part that defies belief (emphasis added):

The session took an awkward turn when witness Ray McGovern, a former intelligence analyst, declared that the United States went to war in Iraq for oil, Israel and military bases craved by administration "neocons" so "the United States and Israel could dominate that part of the world." He said that Israel should not be considered an ally and that Bush was doing the bidding of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.

At Democratic headquarters, where an overflow crowd watched the hearing on television, activists handed out documents repeating two accusations — that an Israeli company had warning of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and that there was an "insider trading scam" on 9/11 — that previously has been used to suggest Israel was behind the attacks.

Such insane conspiratorial charges — that Israel orchestrated the 9/11 attacks, that Jews were forewarned to stay away from the WTC, etc. — have been confined to the most radical, extremist, "death to the Jews" Islamofascist publications and web sites, and to a few non-Islamic groups of crazed anti-Semites and Nazis.

Now, these claims are being distributed at Democratic headquarters in support of a Democratic mock impeachment hearing charging that the President of the United States is controlled by Israel.

It’s inconceivable to me that any Jewish person with a shred of dignity and self-respect would remain in the Democratic Party. 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | 1 Comment »