home

Fact -Free Frederick of Dollywood

Bob Geiger discovered that Fred Thompson writes a column at the ABC Radio web site. Bob spots this gem from the Washington lawyer-lobbyist turned Hollywood actor:

Harry Reid, though, has taken a different route. He made his statement about General Pace on a conference call with fringe elements of the blogosphere who think we're the bad guys. This is a place where even those who think the 9/11 attacks were an inside job find a home."

(Emphasis supplied.) As usual, Fast Freddie is fact-free. 3 of the callers were daily kos Contributing Editors. And at daily kos, in a policy I helped formulate in 2005, 9/11 conspiracy diaries are prohibited. It is a controversial policy in some parts of the Left blogs.

So sorry Frederick of Dollywood, but you can't apply your GOP/Hollywood game of changing the facts to suit your demagoguery. And you are fact-free yet again.

< Wife of Missing Soldier Faces Deportation | Bush Vetoes Stem Cell Research Bill >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Looks like Thompson had a point (1.00 / 0) (#4)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 02:23:55 PM EST
    Uh, this article  by LewRockwell was linked to by Edger on Sun May 14, 2006 at 07:31:21 PM EST.

    Link

    This is from the article.

    Controlled demolition would have required unimpeded access to the WTC, access to explosives, avoiding detection, and the expertise to orchestrate the deadly destruction from a nearby secure location. Such access before 9/11 likely depended on complicity by one or more WTC security companies

    He also on   12/6/06 at 8:24PM quoted this from a link he provided.

    To know the building was about to collapse would require inside knowledge of 'the 9/11 script' and how it was supposed to unfold on that fateful day.


    Um Jim (none / 0) (#6)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 02:38:05 PM EST
    We were talking about Daily Kos.

    Last I looked, neither Edger nor me if you want. were a part of that call.

    Parent

    BTD (1.00 / 0) (#11)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 03:02:27 PM EST
    Are you claiming that only KOS was on the call??

    Parent
    BTD (1.00 / 0) (#12)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 03:04:45 PM EST
    You said:

    3 of the callers were daily kos Contributing Editors.

    Who were the others??

    Parent

    Make an "arguement" before (none / 0) (#14)
    by andgarden on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 03:09:35 PM EST
    doing research, and you lose.

    Parent
    Ah, the vaunted mystery answer (none / 0) (#17)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 03:27:54 PM EST
    Am I suppose to understand that ONLY Kos was involved? No one else?? No one who ALSO had a blog themselves??

    Tell em andgarden. Inquiring minds want to know.

    You see, I don't care if Thompson makes a comment like that. It may even be fake but accurate. And I don't care if BTD takes issue with it.

    But I think worrying and claiming about who was on the call, etc., is much like arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin while ignoring the two central points.

    who think we're the bad guys.

    Do you disagree with that claim?

    This is a place where even those who think the 9/11 attacks were an inside job find a home."

    Roy and I have already covered that.


    Parent

    I know who was on the call (5.00 / 0) (#20)
    by andgarden on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 03:32:37 PM EST
    and a simple search will net you the answer as well. The rest of your comment is absurd.

    Parent
    andgarden .... it isn't my job. (1.00 / 1) (#68)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jun 21, 2007 at 09:40:23 AM EST
    It is generally understood that he who makes the point, proves the point...

    Parent
    Bob Geiger was one (none / 0) (#22)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 03:39:10 PM EST
    He has no comments and has not written a 9/11 Conspiracy post.

    Two were from America Blog, not 911 Conspiracy theorists.

    1 was from MYDD. Also no 911 conspiracies.

    You and Frederick of Dollywood struck out.

    Parent

    Giuliani for President - he knows the future! (none / 0) (#36)
    by Edger on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 06:11:59 PM EST
    You might have a morsel of credibility if you had quoted the context as well, ppj:
    We first reported this 15 months ago but we have now received the video where then Mayor of New York Rudolph Giuliani admits to Peter Jennings that he got a warning that the South Tower was about to collapse.
    ...
    To know the building was about to collapse would require inside knowledge of 'the 9/11 script' and how it was supposed to unfold on that fateful day.
    ...
    ""We were operating out of there when we were told that the World Trade Center was gonna collapse." [sayd Giulianito Peter Jennings of ABC]
    Linking to the video of Giuliani admitting it might have been a good idea too.

    Parent
    Edger (1.00 / 0) (#39)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 06:26:15 PM EST
    I gave the links. Anyone can use them.

    And if you want to claim that Rudy had advance knowledge, be my guest.

    In fact, here is a link to the operatives involved...."

    Parent

    Me? Claim something? (5.00 / 0) (#42)
    by Edger on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 06:48:51 PM EST
    You have it all wrong as usual.

    I'll borrow one of your favorite phrases, ppj.

    He said what he said.

    Or maybe you're a conspiracy theorist? Someone dubbed Giuliani's voice over someone elses?

    Parent

    So... (5.00 / 0) (#43)
    by Edger on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 07:12:14 PM EST
    Either you're the conspiracy theorist, or Giuliani is part of a conspiracy, you figure, ppj?

    Rudy for prez!!!

    Parent

    Sorry, ppj.... I forgot the LINK (5.00 / 0) (#44)
    by Edger on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 08:05:17 PM EST
    Rudy fer preznit!!! He's bound to get a least one vote, right ppj?

    Parent
    edger.. (1.00 / 0) (#71)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jun 21, 2007 at 09:50:53 AM EST
    Please keep on showing us who you are...

    Look out!!! The helicopters are coming!!!!

    BTW - You be the dude who posted the conspiracy links......

    Now if you want to confess that you didn't mean it and that you don't believe the evileeeee Bush and the evileeeee Rudi had fore knowledge and operational details of the 9/11 attack...

    ...we will consider your situation and set the requirements for your penitence.. How does a Crusade to Iran sound??

    ;-)

    Parent

    It is a bit strange (5.00 / 0) (#72)
    by Edger on Thu Jun 21, 2007 at 09:55:02 AM EST
    that Giuliani would claim to know in advance that the WTC was going to collapse, isn't it ppj?

    He's either an idiot, or he's telling the truth.

    Which do you think it is?

    Parent

    Or do you think there was a conspiracy (5.00 / 0) (#73)
    by Edger on Thu Jun 21, 2007 at 09:57:48 AM EST
    and the recording of Rudy saying that was faked? Who would do that? The "vast left wing conspiracy"?

    Parent
    I guess Rudy (none / 0) (#37)
    by Edger on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 06:18:34 PM EST
    needs to be banned.

    Parent
    Banned at Kos? (1.00 / 1) (#26)
    by jarober on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 04:03:14 PM EST
    "And at daily kos, in a policy I helped formulate in 2005, 9/11 conspiracy diaries are prohibited. "

    They are banned in the same way that we've always been at war with EastAsia:

    One

    Two

    Three

    Try This Google Search  for many more.  I especially like the rants about how Kos has banned such comments on the site, given how easy they are to find.

    You can't be expected (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by mcjoan on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 09:18:28 PM EST
    to understand how Daily Kos admin works if you don't post there, and you obviously don't.

    We have a policy of actually deleting only the most egregious comments/diaries--usually just those that out someone. But check the comment history of most of your users linked there, and you'll find that they aren't posting anymore. That's because they've been banned. We don't publicize that fact, nor do we delete their history. We just remove them.

    That's not to say with the thousands of comments posted every day, some don't slip through, but the posting ability of those users usually doesn't last very long.

    Parent

    mcjoan (none / 0) (#51)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 09:55:40 PM EST
    That's not to say with the thousands of comments posted every day, some don't slip through, but the posting ability of those users usually doesn't last very long.

    Okay, I'll buy that, no problem.

    But that merely proves FT's point. And I still maintain that he was making a "general" comment about the Left blogosphere to his base, just as Reid was to his.

    Parent

    Um, no.... (none / 0) (#53)
    by mcjoan on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 10:44:43 PM EST
    They don't "find a home" at Daily Kos. We boot them as soon as we find them. None of the top tier left sites countenance 9/11 conspiracy theories, and certainly none of them forward them. He may have been playing to his base, but that doesn't mean he wasn't lying.

    Parent
    mcjoan (1.00 / 1) (#59)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jun 21, 2007 at 08:49:41 AM EST
    So they don't find a home but they comment until caught and deleted, and all the top tier Left wing sites follow this policy...

    I think you are parsing....

    BTW - Define "top tier."

    Parent

    Jim's understanding is not the best (none / 0) (#54)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 11:12:46 PM EST
    Good morning BTD (none / 0) (#60)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jun 21, 2007 at 08:50:54 AM EST
    Glad to see you are still busy showing us your debating style.

    Have a nice day.

    Parent

    Well, it's easy to prove him wrong, ppj. (none / 0) (#62)
    by Edger on Thu Jun 21, 2007 at 08:54:28 AM EST
    Admit that your faking being not very bright is just a lie.

    Parent
    Or do you agree with him (none / 0) (#63)
    by Edger on Thu Jun 21, 2007 at 08:58:50 AM EST
    that your capacity for understanding is fundamentally limited?

    Parent
    Oy vey (none / 0) (#27)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 04:18:40 PM EST
    I assume your favoriute site prohibit racist remarks.

    Do you think I would have a problem finding them there?

    You can't catch everything. And what is polkiced is diaries.

    There are hundreds of thousands of comments at daily kos.

    Not so many at your favorites sites but has racism found a home there?

    Don't be ridiculous.

    Parent

    Hey yall! (none / 0) (#31)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 04:43:45 PM EST
    Find something else to pick on FT about. This one is working out very well for you.

    Parent
    You must be joking (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 04:48:09 PM EST
    A lying Thompson defneded by a bunch of clueless or dissembling Wingnuts is it not working?

    You must be joking.

    The facts are clear. 911 Conspiracy diaries are not permitted by the bloggers who Reid spoke to. Thompson lied about that.

    That the same Wingnuts here who believe the Iraq War was a good thing to do defend him tells all.

    Parent

    BTD (none / 0) (#50)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 09:49:07 PM EST
    Let's face it. You got caught telling us about a policy that you say was put in place, but isn't enforced...

    But that isn't the issue...

    Come on BTD, we both know that Reid was playing to his base, and FT to his... Why not quit insulting the intelligence of your readers and just go on to something else.

    Parent

    Again Jim (none / 0) (#56)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 11:14:17 PM EST
    your lack of intelligence is showing.

    Parent
    BTD (none / 0) (#61)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jun 21, 2007 at 08:52:32 AM EST
    Are you telling me that Reid and FT weren't playing to their bases??

    Parent
    et al (none / 0) (#32)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 04:44:10 PM EST
    sarcasm alert

    Parent
    You didn't look... (none / 0) (#45)
    by jarober on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 08:12:42 PM EST
    or you would realize that the links I posted are not to comments.  But hey - thanks for playing, and we have still always been at war with EastAsia.

    Parent
    See mcjoan;s comments here (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 11:13:46 PM EST
    Perhaps you can understand that you are full of crap after that.

    More likely you already know.

    Parent

    Honest jocks out there know what Freddy's in for (none / 0) (#1)
    by Ellie on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 01:34:36 PM EST
    Great score on the column!

    Testosterone drenched, Bush era phony jock culture is dependent on gaming the stacked system and getting lavishly handicapped by crooked refs.

    The Republicult has always abused their private access to locked-up resources that should be available to all parties (but aren't) to launch full-throated smear campaigns either magnified by a choir at their back or that can't be oountered by the target -- in this case, Harry Reid -- who has usually been isolated from the crowd and surrounded by an efficient and vicious RW goon squad.

    What I'm enjoying about how quickly Right-Said Fred's rotten smear collapsed into a pile of rancid truthiness is how quickly that crapola gets deflated now that more eyes are out there, vetting and corroborating publicly accessible information, and more voices are out there keeping would-be heirs to the Bush Cheney monarchical bling honest.

    Of course, Dems have to DO something with that and not just expect to wait primly on the sidelines like lords and ladies of the Polistocracy who don't think they have to take a stand.

    As a final note: being a lifelong REAL jock and all-round physical person who's had many many mornings up at the crack of dawn to train for something or other, I LOVE seeing swaggering jock-talking phonies like these sac-waving Repugs get smacked down. It's like someone who didn't do their propers get slammed in a contest right after talking smack. If I were more evolved I'd feel a little sad watching them go down. As it happens, I'm not, so when that kind of spectacle occurs I love it hard.

    Uhm... (none / 0) (#2)
    by roy on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 01:45:21 PM EST
    Policy is one thing, but a little snooping shows conspiracists within DKos.  Maybe this diary repeating Michael Moore's half-veiled conspiracy accusations just hasn't been deleted yet.  

    And of course, there are comments, like this one attached to the diary above:

    The supposed pilot flunked his flight classes when he was flying a small plain.  There's no way he could have executed something so precise at those speeds with  that accuracy.

    And a comment on another (fairly benign) diary:

    It is obvious that the "official version" of how WTC 1, 2 &7 were destroyed cannot be reconciled by basic science. I do not call supporters of the government conspiracy theory "manical" or paranoid".

    From the same diarist, we have a long diary entry arguing that, yes, Bush could have been behind the whole thing:

    The two most frequent responses to the idea that the Bush administration orchestrated 9/11 are that 1) they wouldn't do anything so horrible to their own people, and 2) they are too stupid to do so even if they wanted to.  1) has been dealt with adequately elsewhere, most prominently by David Ray Griffin in all three of his books on 9/11, so suffice it to say here that precisely such horrible things have indeed been done before, often enough and with enough historical certainty that to claim it would not happen again is simply wishful thinking.

    Another diary titled "20 reasons to question the official story of 9/11:

    (9) The military had also conducted drills of planes crashing into the Pentagon

    ...

    (15) The NY Fire Department Chief of Safety stated there were "bombs" and "secondary devices", which caused the explosions in the buildings

    A comment attached to "Was 9/11 a government conspiracy?":

    If the George W. Bush administration wants to prove that a plane hit the pentagon, all they have to do is release one or more of the videos that they confiscated that day.

    An outside release reproduced as the diary "Experts Claim Official 9/11 Story is a Hoax":

    These experts suggest these events may have been orchestrated by elements within the administration to manipulate Americans into supporting policies at home and abroad they would never have condoned absent "another Pearl Harbor."

    Comment attached to same:

    Fact is, when Governments have dirty not-so-little secrets, they've got a vested interest in keeping the truth hidden.

    Structural collapse due to weakening of steel does not occur at the rate of free-fall. Nor does it occur in a symmetrical fashion.

    ...

    Holding a group of blogging elites accountable for the actions of commenters and a minority of writers may be lame, but it doesn't seem to be fact-free in this case.

    You are right on roy, so is FT. (1.00 / 1) (#16)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 03:25:55 PM EST
    There are plenty of people who "find a home" on various blogs w/o having to officially be part of the blog's "staff" or the blog's "elite."

    And, as you correctly pointed out, there are some who have found enough of a "home" on DK to post their 9/11 conspiracy theory diaries there.

    And, obviously, the DK staff/elite certainly have not seen fit to delete or disallow these 9/11 conspiracy diaries to be hosted on their site.

    No need to argue about it, it's obvious to all -and that includes btd. He just likes to split hairs and stir the pot.

    That said, I'm glad btd put this thread up. I never read DK and had no idea it accommodated wackos who cling to these type of conspiracy theories.

    Parent

    Who you calling Wacko? (none / 0) (#25)
    by Peaches on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 04:02:36 PM EST
    I never read DK and had no idea it accommodated wackos who cling to these type of conspiracy theories.

    Squeaky and I resent that implication and, besides, you can't blame Jeralyn for Accommodating us.

    I have read many surveys since 9/11 indicating that most Americans do not believe the official version of 9/11. Maybe that is to be expected from any big event that holds a place in all of our memories, since there really is no justifiable and verifiable version of the event than can be accepted by most people. I know that I have many questions, and have entertained many theories of the events of that day, including the ones claiming it was an inside job. Sorry, but sometimes this one explains some inconsistencies such as the relationship between the bushies/Saudis, the makeup of the hijackers, and the flights allowed immediately after 9/11 to take the Saudis out of the US.

    I'll admit to entertaining a wacko theory or two, but what is one to do when one does not have any idea what happened that fateful day and so many people are out there proposing various theories, even ones that seem preposterous. Well, you got to wade through all of them, even the ones that seem preposterous and sometimes you have to go to places like Dkos to find out about them. All because that day in particular was completely preposterous and unexplainable to the individual mind.

    Parent

    No offense intended, Peaches. (none / 0) (#28)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 04:31:38 PM EST
    You and your theories! ;-)

    Parent
    BTW (none / 0) (#29)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 04:39:45 PM EST
    There is no home for such theories. They are prohibited.

    You are either lyiong or do not understand that sometimes things fall through the c`racks.

    It is just pathetic that you feel it necessary to resort to falsehood to defend Thompson.

    Parent

    Point out my falsehood. (none / 0) (#35)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 04:50:41 PM EST
    Specificity is always helpful.

    Parent
    the enitre comment is false (none / 0) (#46)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 08:31:00 PM EST
    The express policy is that 9/11 Conspiracy diaires are prohibited. There was an uproar about the policy.

    You simply are lying or do not know what you are talking about.

    Parent

    Well, it did take some digging (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Jun 21, 2007 at 12:19:25 PM EST
    (too much, imo) but I finally found this at DK:
    Controversial 9/11 Diaries

    DailyKos accepts that the 9/11 attacks were perpetrated by agents of Al-Qaeda. It is forbidden to write diaries that:

    refer to claims that American, British, Israeli, or any government assisted in the attacks
    refer to claims that the airplanes that crashed into the WTC and Pentagon were not the cause of the damage to those buildings or their subsequent collapse
    Authoring or recommending these diaries may result in banning from Daily Kos.

    Considering the derision DK levels at such conspiracy believers in the paragraphs preceding the above quote, I accept that DK believes in and really does try to enforce this policy.

    Fred's statement is pretty vague considering there were several other bloggers, apparently, on the call in addition to DK, who may well embrace such theories and theorists. Personally, I don't care enough to research who the other bloggers were and/or their policies.

    While there are almost assuredly 9/11 conspiracy theorists who "make a home" at DK, they are not welcome to espouse these theories there.

    As such, I think Fred was wrong w/respect to DK. I think what he meant by his "make a home" comment was that these blogs support such theories and willingly provide "homes" for those who promote such theories. At DK, anyway, that is not the case.

    Parent

    Come on BTD (none / 0) (#48)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 09:41:13 PM EST
    The fact that they are prohibited is useless unless it is enforced.

    Parent
    Did you read beyond the headlines? (none / 0) (#52)
    by roy on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 10:13:18 PM EST
    Geez, Jim, it's hard being on your side.

    If you'd read more of the comments, you'd have noticed that the DKos commentariat largely regards these conspiracy theories as aberrations.  It looks pretty clear that the policy is enforced, but imperfectly, just like pretty much any policy.

    We may as well say that the prohibition of murder is useless when some murders go unpunished, since the prohibition is "useless unless it is enforced."

    (I still think this constitutes the nuts "finding a home", but it's an illicit home, like rats living in the walls.  I make a good faith effort to keep the rats out, and I'm reasonably successful, but some still get in.  Now they live here.  They found a home.)

    Parent

    roy (1.00 / 0) (#66)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jun 21, 2007 at 09:32:57 AM EST
    You think I was too harsh on BTD?? Maybe. But he is a hard guy to be nice to.

    What I think is that FT was refering to the Left blogosphere in general and was pumping up his base, as was Reid. When you brought in dKos and I brought in Edger he immdiately decided that Reid was talking to X numbers of people at dKos and that he had prevented that from happening by putting a policy in place.... After it was shown that the policy didn't work he decided that what he meant was they didn't "find a home."

    Along the way, since BTD loves to split hairs and call people liars and unintelligent who disagree with him, I asked for the exact numbers of dKos people on the call and if, perhaps, they also didn't have a blog themselves. He never answered. andgarden made a snark, but she also never answered.

    mcjoan made a rational comment and I agreed with her that some fall through the cracks. But if you read her comment, it says:

    We have a policy of actually deleting only the most egregious comments/diaries--usually just those that out someone.

    I don't know what that means. Usually "outing" refers to outing a person who is gay. Egregious is also not defined by her. Is all conspiracy comments automatically egregious?

    But check the comment history of most of your users linked there, and you'll find that they aren't posting anymore. That's because they've been banned. We don't publicize that fact, nor do we delete their history. We just remove them.

    This is another confusing statement. I may misunderstand, but if you don't delete their history that tells me their comments are still there, in the atchives...

    So perhaps what they have found is a retirement home...

    Parent

    And Fred Thompson (none / 0) (#57)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 11:16:15 PM EST
    did not mean what you mean and you know it Roy.

    Parent
    Um (none / 0) (#3)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 01:57:26 PM EST
    That is absurd. Thompson said 911 Conspiricists "find a home." that is flatly and unequivocally false.

    Come now Roy.


    Parent

    BTD (none / 0) (#5)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 02:27:34 PM EST
    It is obvious that Thompson was saying, "in general."

    Parent
    Why quotes about "in general"? (none / 0) (#7)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 02:39:32 PM EST
    He talks about a specific call.

    He was dead wrong.

    And now you try this game?

    Sheesh. You make me think E is right about your character. I would rather not think that Jim.

    Parent

    BTD (1.00 / 0) (#10)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 03:01:29 PM EST
    Actually, what you had rather not think about me, or any subject is not of concern to me. Perhaps it is to Edger. ;-)

    Now. Let's examine this:

    Harry Reid, though, has taken a different route. He made his statement about General Pace on a conference call with fringe elements of the blogosphere who think we're the bad guys.

    The previous sentence clearly states that Thompson is speaking of a telephone call/conversation to/with/between Reid and what Thompson calls the "fringe elements of the blogosphere."

    You may disagree with his assessment, but I don't see any realistic way for you to call him wrong unless you can prove that there were no other callers besides the three you mention.

    He then defines that as being:

    ....a place where even those who think the 9/11 attacks were an inside job find a home."

    To me that is a general statement about the Left side of the blogosphere. I have provided two links to comments by Edger and Roy has chipped in with several of his own from Dkos. I opine that they are many more blogs and comments of that type.

    Parent

    You gotta be kidding me (none / 0) (#24)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 03:41:47 PM EST
    Did you read what you just wrote?


    Parent
    Heh. (none / 0) (#58)
    by Edger on Thu Jun 21, 2007 at 12:57:08 AM EST
    Maybe you're right about him after all. Maybe I give him to much credit? ;-)

    ....
    But let's ask him.

    PPJ? Are you smarter than you appear to be?

    Parent

    Edger - Speaking of smart (1.00 / 0) (#64)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jun 21, 2007 at 08:59:17 AM EST
    Tell us more about the evil Bushies and/or Rudies who you write about having pre-knowledge of the 9/11 attack.

    Look out for the black heliocopters....

    Get your tin hat here!!!!

    BTW - Are you thinking of going to work for Rosie??

    Parent

    ppj, your argument is with Rudy, not with me (5.00 / 0) (#65)
    by Edger on Thu Jun 21, 2007 at 09:06:27 AM EST
    Rudy claimed pre-knowledge of the collapse of the WTC. I just quoted him.

    Maybe you're not smarter than you appear? Is that what you're trying to tell me?

    Parent

    Edger (1.00 / 0) (#67)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jun 21, 2007 at 09:37:03 AM EST
    You wrote what you wrote on two occassions.

    I can probably find more.

    I am told that silver polish does a reasonably good on Tin Hats. Improves reception and appearance.
    You can buy it at your local WalMart....

    ;-)


    Parent

    And I doubt that Rudy shops at Walmart. (5.00 / 0) (#70)
    by Edger on Thu Jun 21, 2007 at 09:45:47 AM EST
    What about you?

    Parent
    edger - Do I shop at Walmart?? (1.00 / 0) (#75)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jun 21, 2007 at 10:09:05 AM EST
    Yes. And I use my Medicare subsidized Rx insurance to buy my drugs....

    Thank you President Bush for overcoming the resistance of the hard hearted Democrats to helping us seasoned citizens have a few sheckels left over to buy food with and pay for our heating bills...
    Why the Demos hate us so I just can't understand.

    Parent

    Some of this "de-baiting" stuff (5.00 / 0) (#77)
    by Edger on Thu Jun 21, 2007 at 10:20:40 AM EST
    might be easier for you if you stayed off the drugs, ppj.

    Parent
    edger (none / 0) (#88)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 12:56:59 AM EST
    I hope you never need drugs, edger.

    But if you do, thank Bush.

    Parent

    Thank Bush? (none / 0) (#90)
    by Edger on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 06:41:23 AM EST
    Thanks Bush!

    Beats Castro all to hell doesn't he, ppj, while we're on the subject of drugs.

    TWN:

    Cuba gets much wrong -- but after Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, Haditha, and frankly 47 million uninsured Americans with no health care -- America has a diminished level of moral credibility to stand on when criticizing illiberal regimes.  Today, Cuba is exporting doctors whereas it used to export revolution and weaponry.  Without getting too deep for the moment, just ask yourself which country in the world tops the charts on exporting armaments and revolution.
    We may have tripped over another conspiracy here, ppj. A Cuban Commie Pinko Conspiracy Plot this time. A plot, ppj. A fearmongering terror plot to smear and slander Bush by casting doubt on his economic policies. Those hordes of BHAW's are everywhere ppj. Their probably in your town by now. On your street, ppj. They stop at nothing till the forced you submit to Sharia Law.

    Sharia Law? How did we get on Sharia law? That's a Muslim thing, isn't it, ppj?

    What does Sharia Law have to do with Rudy (who?) and a Cuban Commie Pinko Conspiracy Plot anyway?

    Try to focus. It was the drugs that made you thank Bush. The propaganda from the liberal media conspiracy made you do everything else.

    Parent

    Completely OT Edger (none / 0) (#91)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 08:47:32 AM EST
    but really wanted to share this with you.  I have been looking around on the web and found zip.  I won't be making any calls around cuz I'm tired of being my husband's trouble making wife, I need a break from it.  We went out for awhile last night.  Ran into a soldier I know who has been recruiting for a year, he's here right now going through ANOC which is an advanced training course and makes him more promotable.  He told me that when he gets back to his recruiting station the whole station is to start draft procedures training.  Something about the procedures and legalities that recruiters need to follow when someone has been drafted and the recruiters go get them.  The only military time I know as a wife is volunteer time and what he was describing.....recruiters going to get someone for military service and it isn't that person choice is disgusting to me!  Is this how it was done before?  I was too young then to know much about what was going on during the last draft.

    Parent
    I've spent a little while looking around (none / 0) (#92)
    by Edger on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 10:24:27 AM EST
    and although there's quite a bit available on the web about Selective Service generally and the fact that inductees have 10 days to report to a Military Entrance Processing Station after they receive an induction notice - I can't find anything specifically about procedures and legalities that recruiters need to follow when someone has been drafted and the recruiters go get them. Do they have arrest power if the inductee refuses? I would imagine that legally and technically the inductee is a member of the service at that point and is required to follow orders.

    In May 2004, the Seattle Post Intelligencer published an article about a document they received through the Freedom of Information Act. The paper learned that the Social Security Serice (SSS) is currently "designing procedures" for the implementation of a "Skills Draft" and had held a top-level meeting on the subject with deputy undersecretaries at the Defense Department. This draft would change the essential mission of the Selective Service and require "virtually every young American," male and female ages 18-34, to register for the skills draft and list all the occupations they are proficient in to fill labor shortages throughout nearly the entire government.  
    I have the feeling you're looking for more than that though. Are Psych and physical skills they use and procedures they follow more what you had in mind?

    There are other 'options' available also.

    Parent

    Thanks for your input (none / 0) (#95)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 02:48:36 PM EST
    I haven't any idea what the training involves.  He didn't even really have an idea of what the training involves, just knows it is scheduled happen when he gets back from ANOC.

    Parent
    You're right, ppj. (1.00 / 0) (#69)
    by Edger on Thu Jun 21, 2007 at 09:43:56 AM EST
    I have quoted Giuliani admitting pre-knowledge ot the collapse of the WTC on more than one occassion.

    This would probably be much easier for you if you'd first clear up any questions about you intelligence level and whether you're just faking being mentally challenged or really are as  intellectually deprived as many think you are.

    Parent

    edger - You must be tired of dancing (1.00 / 0) (#74)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jun 21, 2007 at 10:01:49 AM EST
    How anyone who is a conspiracy believer, such as you evidently are since you link to such sites, can speak of intelligence is beyond me.

    Answer this.

    Do you believe Rudi, Bush anyone outside the al-Qaida terrorists, had pre knowledge and operational details of 9/11.

    Is it your opinion that a conspiracy existed outside of al-Qaida??

    Yes? No?

    Parent

    I've already answered that, ppj. (5.00 / 0) (#76)
    by Edger on Thu Jun 21, 2007 at 10:19:36 AM EST
    I think Rudy is either an idiot, or he he's telling the truth.

    Which do you think is the case?

    Bear in mind that Rudy also has some paranoia issues and thinks that there are billions of crazed murderers out to get him and you.

    Either that or he's just fearmongering and lying to the suckers to convince them to lie to themselves that he's not an idiot and to vote for him.

    There is a fourth possibility too. Maybe someone lied to him about the WTC's imminent collapse and he believed them, which would imply the first possibility - that Rudy is just an idiot. In which case he really did believe it was about to collapse (which it did, - curious, that)  and was telling the truth.

    Of course if Rudy is too stupid to see through lies then he's not much of a candidate for preznitwit, is he?

    Or is he? What do you think?

    Parent

    edger - believes that there was a conspiracy. (1.00 / 0) (#78)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jun 21, 2007 at 11:00:59 AM EST
    The question was, do you, or do you not believe there was a conspiracy.

    You understand it.

    It isn't a trick. You either do, or you do not.

    Your squirming on the above shows that you believe there was.

    Your link to Lew Rockwell further proves it.

    Parent

    Sigh. As I said, ppj. (5.00 / 0) (#80)
    by Edger on Thu Jun 21, 2007 at 11:09:43 AM EST
    I think Rudy is either an idiot, or he he's telling the truth.

    Which do you think is the case?

    Bear in mind that Rudy also has some paranoia issues and thinks that there are billions of crazed murderers out to get him and you.

    Either that or he's just fearmongering and lying to the suckers to convince them to lie to themselves that he's not an idiot and to vote for him.

    So yes, Rudy seems to have fantastical delusions of a vast conspiracy of people out to get him and you.

    He's right out there with Glenn Reynolds in that respect.

    Back in February Reynolds was calling for assassination campaigns.

    He figures that government sanctioned and executed murder of Iranian scientists and clerics should be included in the foreign policy toolbox.

    Good plan, Glenn.

    Should be a cakewalk to sell to the suckers. Sorry, I mean to the peasants.

    The bonus is that when the Iranians retaliate they'll become terrorists who attacked unprovoked, thus justifying the WOT.

    Of course.

    They're backwards radical Islamofascist extremists bent on world domination, who are simply incapable of understanding that being hated and murdered by knuckledragging radical Christofascist extremists with delusions of vast conspiracies is done for their own good.

    What don't Rudy's fantasy boogeymen get?

    They're such ingrates, aren't they ppj?

    Rudy's got your support by now, ppj?

    Parent

    Look Rudy... sorry, I mean PPJ... (5.00 / 0) (#81)
    by Edger on Thu Jun 21, 2007 at 11:37:48 AM EST
    I've been doing my damnedest th past few days to convince everyone else that you're not as intellectually compromised as BTD and 75% of the world believes you are.

    But I have to admit that this exchange with you this morning has badly shaken my faith in my own powers of assessment of your mentation capabilitities.

    As a matter of fact, I'd be pretty damn close to losing my religion here over this... if I had one.

    Please restore my faith - tell me it's all an act and that you are not as analytically deficient as you appear to be pretending to be.

    Parent

    edger (none / 0) (#87)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 12:55:39 AM EST
    Forget about Rudi.

    You either believe there was a conspiracy, or you don't.

    Answer the question.

    It isn't hard.

    Yes or no.

    Which is it??

    Parent

    I was wrong Rudy... Sorry, I mean PPJ. (none / 0) (#89)
    by Edger on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 03:07:39 AM EST
    I misread you completely.

    In the face of all my now dashed hopes for you, I'm forced by the results of repeated observations to go with the assessment of BTD and 75% of the world.

    Good thing I had no faith to lose, isn't it?

    Parent

    BTD (1.00 / 0) (#13)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 03:06:34 PM EST
    Further on down you complain that I mention Edger..

    Tell me. Do you think it fair to use his name in a snark, and then run back when I use it in turn??

    Parent

    Interesting, though, that btd (none / 0) (#21)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 03:35:16 PM EST
    didn't dispute Fred's claim that the bloggers think we're the bad guys...

    Parent
    Well Liars for sure (none / 0) (#30)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 04:40:57 PM EST
    jim has character? (none / 0) (#8)
    by cpinva on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 02:52:44 PM EST
    who knew? actually, so do i. it's pretty low, but character nonetheless.

    with respect to mr. thompsons much touted "run for the roses", his rented pickup truck will, i guarantee, get a flat by 12-31-2007. by jan. 1, 2008, it will have been towed to a garage, never to be seen or heard from again.

    that hissing sound you hear is his campaign deflating. fred, you might want to reconsider signing that new contract for law & order.

    just a thought guy.

    "mars is warming!"

    :Pick anoyjefr (none / 0) (#19)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 03:32:12 PM EST
    The problem the left has (none / 0) (#9)
    by HeadScratcher on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 03:01:12 PM EST
    is that there are some people who (wrongly or rightly) believe in the 9/11 conspiracy by Bush...Just this week I heard it by Randi Rhodes on Air America. Because some of those in power don't refute the notion of a 9/11 conspiracy by Bush then it will, by osmosis, become part of the party.

    Here's the same issue in reverse. Every republican should either say to South Carolina to take down the flag or they actually support the racist flag. There really is no in between. Either repudiate it or get tarred by it.

    Confederate Flag. Battle and otherwise (none / 0) (#18)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 03:30:20 PM EST
    You are 100% correct.

    However, are you saying that the SC Demos have NO power??

    Parent

    Frederick of Dollywood (none / 0) (#15)
    by Compound F on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 03:15:40 PM EST
    gorgeous.

    Oh please (none / 0) (#33)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 04:45:28 PM EST


    Who died and made you head of your debating team? (none / 0) (#38)
    by Ellie on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 06:21:40 PM EST
    Seriously, it's not a rhetorical question given the quality of your argument and the ease with which you pull out this Argumentum ex Rectum.

    Help along students of your craft. How long did it take for you to come up for this devastating "Oh please." that I assume serves you well and frequently in your dealings (given the speed with which it appeared here)?

    Parent

    well excuseeee me. (none / 0) (#40)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 06:38:15 PM EST
    What argument? The one in which I note it makes no difference how many KOS memebers were dancing on the head of a pin, ooops, on the call, or my point that Talk Left has its own resident believer??? aka Edger.

    Note that I don't try and refute those who believe. To each his own I usually say, although I do kinda josh them a bit....

    My comment was just noting that your mia culpa is just so well, please...... You can of course, prove your point that the moonbat's moonbats are not the sole keepers of the paranoia flame...just toss a few examples on the table...

    Parent

    Well in that case ... (none / 0) (#41)
    by Ellie on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 06:42:54 PM EST
    ... your Rectum is much larger than the generous allotment I imagined when factoring how large it must be to house the Argumentum you ex'd from it a couple of panels ago.

    Parent
    ellie (none / 0) (#49)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 09:45:49 PM EST
    I find your fixation with my a*se on par with the quality of your comment.

    Parent
    I refrain from discussing body parts (5.00 / 1) (#83)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Jun 21, 2007 at 01:03:30 PM EST
    and any any any form of discipline even in snark around PPJ because he always takes raw data and marries it to whatever he is watching in the other window he has open on his computer while he's here.

    Parent
    Aaaahhhh. Jeezus, Tracy. (5.00 / 1) (#84)
    by Edger on Thu Jun 21, 2007 at 01:09:09 PM EST
    Do you have something I can use to wipe the coffee off my monitor?

    Parent
    Other than Iraq things are a (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Jun 21, 2007 at 01:23:32 PM EST
    little bit better for my family this moment in time.  So much grieving and pain in this household though right now.  It has caused me to question how aware of the moments of my life I have challenged myself to be and teaching that to my children who really aren't granted permission to tell the whole world to "F" off if they want to and it is needed for their mental/spiritual survival. If you aren't numb or somehow splintered within Bush has brought us all much pain at times, and some people's children are needlessly dead because of him and some people's children will be forever scarred and broken because of him.  Mine will make it though, just need lots of time and room to grieve.

    Parent
    They'll make it. (5.00 / 2) (#86)
    by Edger on Thu Jun 21, 2007 at 01:38:44 PM EST
    They have a good mom...

    Parent
    Maternity Leave? (none / 0) (#93)
    by squeaky on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 12:48:37 PM EST
    Politico's Mike Allen told NPR that Fred Thompson has a notable foreign policy advisor: first daughter of the OVP, Liz Cheney.

    War & Piece

    Oh Right (none / 0) (#94)
    by squeaky on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 12:51:51 PM EST
    Nothing to do with maternity leave, Liz is the straight one.

    Parent