From: Dave

Subject: Re: What hit the Pentagon on 9-11?

Bart -
 
Why the link to the slick, fictional, mesmerizing piece of garbage that directs 
the viewer to conclude that Flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon?  

Why that link?
Why not that link?
Can I get a list of approved links from you?

 

Did you know this was called "Objective Reality"?  

No, but what difference would that make?
What if he called it, "A Citizen with Questions?"
Would it be OK if I ran it with that title?

Is your hatred of the Bush Crime Family so acute that you are willing to trade in your credibility 
by embracing moonbat theories on 9/11?   Hasn't the BCF done enough PROVABLE dirty deeds?

Dude, flame off.
You're so high on your horse your nose is starting to bleed.

How should I answer those who write and say,
"Why did you print that crap from Dave the idiot?"

The only thing we know for sure about 9-11 is that Bush doesn't want the truth to come out.
What's wrong with asking a few questions?

 
What is objective about starting that video with a speech from ADOLPH HITLER?
 
I think you already have that answer - why are you asking?
 

What is objective about showing SELECTIVE quotes from witnesses - and IGNORING the dozens 
and dozens of statements from witnesses who clearly saw a large Boeing airliner hit the Pentagon?

Because those selective quotes exist.
If I'm writing a story about the horrors of Katrina, I'm not going to include statements from everyone 
who thought the feds and the cops did a great job. I'm going to talk to the ones who did.

 
What is objective about displaying a "moving" quote on a black screen, to mesmerize the viewer?
What is objective about putting a soundtrack of driving rock music behind the video?

Dude, I think it's called "film making."

 
The fools who made the video - who wish other fools to follow their absurd fantasy that Flight 77 did not 
hit the Pentagon - were foolish enough to include a picture clearly showing a Boeing wheel rim in the wreckage!

You clearly are behind the "official" version of 9-11.
That's OK, sometimes without concrete facts you can hold in your hand,
you have little choice but to accept that which is accepted by the masses.

Does that mean Oswald shot JFK?
Does that mean Sirhan shot RFK?
Does that mean Ray shot MLK?

We don't know, because our government is lying to us.

 
Either you actually believe this moonbat stuff, Bart, which is disappointing enough
- or, you are floating this garbage out there to stir controversy.  And that is worse.
 

Dave, you sit on your high horse and decree that there are two, and only two possibilities.
The idea that I might put some radical, anti-Bush idea in print pisses you off?
If that's the caee, how did your e-mail make it on the page?

Question: Is it true I only print stuff from the crazies?
 

Did you know that the entire missile-into-the-Pentagon fantasy was started by a French author, 
who did not even come to this country to research his "revealing" book?  
The gullibility of the American people is a ceaseless wonder, and is being shamefully exploited 
via 9/11 conspiracy theories.  Now you are promoting them.  How appalling.
 
Dave
 

Dave, you and your horse are on ice thinner than Sorvino shaves his garlic.
Truth is, you have an opinion and you want others to agree with it.
No problem there, you just have to keep it in your pants.

The "moonbat" stuff exists because, as I said, it's certain that Bush is lying about 9-11
but more importantly, the physical evidence doesn't jive with the lies we're being told.

Some accuse me of carrying Bush's water when I say *I* wasn't at the CIA-senate-Saddam briefing,
so I can't say why the senate Dems believed the Pentagon's presentation - we call that an "unknown."

You, on the other hand, are giving the rest of us YOUR Nancy Grace Guarantee

that the plane carrying Barbara Olson and the others did, indeed, hit the Pentagon.

You can't do that.

My position is, "We don't know, so we're looking for facts."
Your position seems to be, "The facts are in and everything is settled."

I profess my ignorance.
You profess your infallibility.
 

By any chance, ...do you play high stakes poker?
 

 Comments?


 back to  bartcop.com
 


 
 
Current Issue
Back Issues
About BartCop.com
Members (need password)
Subscribe to BartCop!
Donate Once
Contact Us
Advertise With Us
BartCop:
Entertainment
The Forum  - bartcopforum@yahoo.com
Live CHAT
The Reader
Bart Cook
Sports
Stickers
Bookstore
More Links
Perkel's Blog
Power of Nightmares
Cost of Bush's greed
White Rose Society
Project 60
Chinaco Anejo
EVEN MORE LINKS

 
Web BartCop.com


 


Search Now:
 
In Association with Amazon.com

 
Link Roll
Altercation
American Politics Journal 
Atrios
Barry Crimmins
Betty Bowers
Buzzflash 
Consortium News 
Daily Howler
Daily Kos
Democatic Underground 
Disinfotainment Today 
Evil GOP Bastards
Faux News Channel 
Gene Lyons 
Greg Palast
The Hollywood Liberal 
Internet Weekly
Jesus General
Joe Conason 
Josh Marshall
Liberal Oasis
Make Them Accountable 
Mark Morford 
Mike Malloy 
Political Wire
Randi Rhodes
Rude Pundit 
Smirking Chimp
Take Back the Media 
Whitehouse.org
More Links

Ned Lamont


 
 
 
Privacy Policy
. .