If you've got a couple hours you could watch this film. Watch the whole thing, though, because it covers a lot of ground.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Put On Your Duncekap
Total Pageviews
About Me
Links
- Animation BGs
- Becky's Homemade Songs
- cartoondavid
- Chess
- Daily Grail
- Dangerous Minds
- Documentary Heaven
- Good News Network
- Hairy Doodle
- Holley's House
- Incoherent Thought
- Jason Reicher
- Mary Rappazzo
- Matt Taibbi
- Microsongs
- NCR News
- Olivia Pecini
- Patrick Morgan
- Rad How To
- Random Magic
- Ryan's Blogorama
- Sharon Spotbottom
- Tara Nicole
- The Tina Show
- Uh Oh
- Wonderings & Wanderings
Followers (Kornerites)
Moonphase
CURRENT MOON
32 comments:
It does cover a lot of ground. In particular it covers the ground of the fever swamps of the moonbat Troofer conspiracists movie when it starts going on about the WTC.
Read and watch the following to add a dose of reason and sanity:
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=1
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3214024953129565561&q=%22screw+loose+change%22&total=34&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0
Penn and Teller even have a good show debunking this 9/11 crap as well:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kcrF346sS_I
The links didn't publish correctly although they did in the preview. Just Google for the links:
Popular Mechanics debunked all this in the March 2005 issue.
"Screw Loose Change" is a video that eviscerates the Truther's movie scene by scene.
Penn and Teller debunked the same on one of their episodes of Bullshit.
Bush pardoned Libby to save his own ass. Scooter was gonna blab and blab and blab.
That movie was neato. I ain't watched it all yet but I'll watch it later. Thanks for that.
You must be flattered that the right-wing think tank evangelical conspiracy pays so much attention to your blog.
I think it's pretty safe to say that Anonymous is a cowardly little fuck.
You guys are great! One comment about Bush and Libby and another saying I'm a cowardly little fuck because I point out that the conspiracy angle in this movie has been thoroughly debunked?
Is that your version of making a point?
Right wing think tank evangelical conspiracy....so many big bad words all in one sentence! How about Bu$Hitler Reich Wing Christocracy? At least that has some creativity going for it.
I'm mostly of the libertarian persuasion and am an atheist, but let's not let that get in the way of stringing supposed pejoratives together.
I guess you just have to agree with the thoroughly debunked conspiracy theories or risk being labeled as a heretic.
Keep up that intellectual diversity, people.
All hail Chimperor Abu McHaliburton as our Lord and Savior....
There is so much more to the film than 9/11 conspiracy theory. In fact, I'd say that the film could stand alone pretty well without going in to that at all. To hear John F. Kennedy speaking against secrecy, and secret societies and secret proceedings as being repugnant to our free and open society on the heels of Bush's pathetic exchange with that reporter regarding why he and Cheney were going to meet together, and SECRETLY with the 9/11 commission was damning in itself! Whether the government was in on it or not is almost beside the point when we look at what they've done in the aftermath of 9/11 (Iraq; Afghanistan; the Patriot Act; warrantless wiretapping; extraordinary renditions; suspension of habeas corpus; etc. etc.)
Anyway, thanks for the links "Anonymous," I found them informative. But, c'mon Joan! Spare us the martyr routine! Your comments always include thinly veiled invective, and when people react to your subtext you play the part of the wounded innocent. Admit it, you enjoy pushing people's buttons! I bet that when you were just a wee little "Anonymous" you enjoyed throwing rocks at hornets' nests.
"There is so much more to the film than 9/11 conspiracy theory. In fact, I'd say that the film could stand alone pretty well without going in to that at all."
Uh, sure--since the middle third is demonstrably bogus I'm sure you can still highly recommend it. I'm not religious and I don't like taxes so I guess it's a great film.
Since you are rightly concerned with civil liberties I'm sure you are aware of the provisions of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996? That legislation called for domestic spying and had a tremendous impact on habeas corpus in the federal courts. Read up on it--it was the Clinton/Reno response to the OKC bombing. Chimpy Bin Bu$HitlerBurtonGrab wasn't even in office yet.
As to martyrdom--sorry that's not true either. You can't refute a thorough debunking of the 9/11 conspiracy crap with a string of name calling. That is neither a refutation or an argument. That is not reacting to the subtext--it's blind ignorance.
As to any invective, well, you just posted a Thruther sympathetic video---that's just a normal reaction.
OK, "Anonymous," you win. I don't know what I was thinking by recommending that film. God, I'm such an idiot.
And, as for the other people who left comments, I don't think they were trying to "...refute a thorough debunking of the 9/11 conspiracy crap with a string of name calling." I think they were just calling you names because you come off as such an asshole.
You're probably a great guy, I don't know (or do I know you? I wonder...) and, you seem to have an encyclopedic knowledge of American history. If you have your own blog, or if you've produced anything at all, I'd actually like to see what you have to say. I mean that sincerely. But, if your output consists only of, "edifying" comments on other people's blogs, then, at least share with us what sites/books/films etc. that you find interesting.
Indeed, I am a great guy.
Due to limited time and a private nature I have no output other than feisty yet polite dinner argument.
You are the only one who has ever gotten a blog comment from me—and that is only because I personally know one of your commenters.
However, I’ll give you two people that I believe should merit your attention. The first is Mark Steyn, you can read him at steynonline.com. Here is an essay of his that makes points you probably have never heard elsewhere: www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110007760 If the link doesn’t come out right just Google Mark Steyn and It’s the Demography Stupid and look for the link from Opinionjournal.com.
The next is the brilliant economist, historian and writer Thomas Sowell. Sowell was an avowed Marxist even while studying under Milton Friedman at the University of Chicago. What turned his worldview around was when he worked in government and realized it couldn’t possibly do what the Marxists expected of it. He has many books and writes a column at townhall.com.
Here are a few quotes:
No matter how disastrously some policy has turned out, anyone who criticizes it can expect to hear: "But what would you replace it with?" When you put out a fire, what do you replace it with?
Liberalism is totalitarianism with a human face. (Related non Sowell sidequote: "The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened." - Norman Thomas, Socialist Party Presidential Candidate and co-founder of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).)
It is amazing that people who think we cannot afford to pay for doctors, hospitals, and medication somehow think that we can afford to pay for doctors, hospitals, medication and a government bureaucracy to administer it.
If you have always believed that everyone should play by the same rules and be judged by the same standards, that would have gotten you labeled a radical 60 years ago, a liberal 30 years ago and a racist today.
Much of the social history of the Western world, over the past three decades, has been a history of replacing what worked with what sounded good.
The first lesson of economics is scarcity: there is never enough of anything to fully satisfy all those who want it. The first lesson of politics is to disregard the first lesson of economics.
The most basic question is not what is best, but who shall decide what is best.
It is precisely those things which belong to “the people” which have historically been despoiled—wild creatures, the air, and waterways being notable examples. This goes to the heart of why property rights are socially important in the first place. Property rights mean self-interested monitors. No owned creatures are in danger of extinction. No owned forests are in danger of being leveled. No one kills the goose that lays the golden egg when it is his goose.
The most fundamental fact about the ideas of the political left is that they do not work. Therefore we should not be surprised to find the left concentrated in institutions where ideas do not have to work in order to survive.
What 'multiculturalism' boils down to is that you can praise any culture in the world except Western culture - and you cannot blame any culture in the world except Western culture.
What is ominous is the ease with which some people go from saying that they don't like something to saying that the government should forbid it. When you go down that road, don't expect freedom to survive very long.
Slavery was just not an issue, not even among intellectuals, much less among political leaders, until the 18th century -- and then only in Western civilization. Among those who turned against slavery in the 18th century were George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry and other American leaders. You could research all of 18th century Africa or Asia or the Middle East without finding any comparable rejection of slavery there. But who is singled out for scathing criticism today? American leaders of the 18th century.
Like a baseball game, wars are not over till they are over. Wars don't run on a clock like football. No previous generation was so hopelessly unrealistic that this had to be explained to them.
Those who pose as the biggest champions of the poor are almost invariably the biggest opponents of means tests. They want bigger government and the poor are just a means to that end. Whether the issue is housing, medical care or innumerable other things, the argument will be made that the poor are unable to get some benefit that the government ought to provide for them. But the minute you accept that, the switch takes place and suddenly we are no longer talking about some benefit confined to the poor but about "universal health care" or "affordable housing" as a "right" for everyone.
To the economically illiterate, if some company makes a million dollars in profit, this means that their products cost a million dollars more than they would have cost without profits. It never occurs to such people that these products might cost several million dollars more to produce than if they were produced by enterprises operating without the incentives to be efficient created by the prospect of profits.
What is history but the story of how politicians have squandered the blood and treasure of the human race.
The assumption that spending more of the taxpayers’ money will make things better has survived all kinds of evidence that it has made things worse. The black family—which survived slavery, discrimination, poverty, wars and depressions—began to come apart as the federal government moved in with its well-financed programs to “help.”
Ahhh, someone needs a girlfriend.
Is it fun sitting in the dark talking to yourself.
You know somebody that posts here? Do they post in secret like you?
Oh don't forget that Bush is a criminal.
Have Liberal day
Another intelligent comment!
Married thanks.
Pluot
Anonymous: Thanks for the recommendations. You don't seem so bad when you refrain from saying things like "moonbat."
I can't say I agree with everything you've given me to read (for instance, off the top of my head, the quote about "Self-interested monitors" in the quote about property rights doesn't ring entirely true. I think that someone who owns forested property may not "kill the goose who lays the golden eggs" by clearcutting it, but I bet he won't take pains to safeguard, say, the spotted owl who lays the spotted owl eggs if it cuts into his logging profits.) But, I'm always open to learning new things and hearing diverse opinions. I'll definitely follow up on your Steyn & Sowell recommendations.
Karen: Nothing breaks the tension better than a well-timed pluot!
"Married thanks."
Yeah, sometimes the same thing as not having a girlfriend.
Spend less time in the basement clenching your fists and more time with your honey.
You could also Post under your real name and folks will interface with you better.
Remember BUSH LIED and THOUSANDS DIED.
Smile liberally and often.
Bush:
This seems like clenched fists to me:
"Bush pardoned Libby to save his own ass. Scooter was gonna blab and blab and blab."
"Oh don't forget that Bush is a criminal."
"Remember BUSH LIED and THOUSANDS DIED."
You must be trying to be ironic.
Is it really necessary to call Anonymous names and assault his marital status? The guy is just putting out a contrasting opinion based on his own research. Are you so afraid of his opinion that you have to find a neat little label to put around his neck? The only intelligent debate here is happening between Kenny and Anonymous, why not listen to the dissenter and learn as opposed to insulting.
No clenching here chief. All smiles and giggles at your long winded tirades that pop out of your pie hole every time Kenny posts something even slightly left wing.
Mr.Baffo
Name calling?
Did you miss his Moonbat opening?
Let see, Bush is a coward that has never done a job that any one with half a mind would consider adequate. Unless you think killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqs while supposedly freeing them is an adequate job.
More Liberal smiles coming your way. ;)
Pluot, pluot, pluot, pluot!!
Kenny's Korner- I came back to your site to watch that movie again and realized that I owe you an apology for "flaming" on your website - I got pissed and flew off the handle. I am a name-caller; also a hair-puller. I am bad. I prefer the direct approach to making anonymous posts.
Just wanted to clarify that I was not reacting to Mr. Anonymous' political beliefs per se, because I'm not at all interested in them -I don't believe they constitute meaningful or well-thought out or respectful debate/dissent. What I was reacting to was this fellow's habit of posting vaguely inflammatory/discrediting/ provocative stuff. I hate that because it is annoying and clutters up otherwise enjoyable reading material.
But my New Year's resolution was to stop flying off the handle. No more flipping people off on the road, no more flaming internet posts. Mea culpa, KK.
I wonder who the commentor is that this guy knows. I think he wants us to wonder that. Does he know Johnny Baffo? Based on his comment, I wonder if Mr. Anonymous and Johnny Baffo are the same person.
I breathe in Mr. Anonymous' pain and suffering, and breathe out healing.
Bush: You bore me. Do you have any other tricks or is this it?
ChristyH: "-I don't believe they constitute meaningful or well-thought out or respectful debate/dissent"
I assume you mean---as opposed to Bush's?
"What I was reacting to was this fellow's habit of posting vaguely inflammatory/discrediting/ provocative stuff."
I have commented on three occasions in the last 9 months or so. That is some habit.
If you want to believe the debunked portions of the film that is your perogative. But if you breathe in those falsehoods what are you exhaling?
Well, he didn't refute it, so I'm thinking that Mr. Anonymous and Johnny Baffo are the same guy.
I'm done now. Sorry again.
Mindpunch! Pluot!!
Okay, now I'm really done.
Yet Mr.Anonymouse you keep showing up and opening your silly pie hole.
Shock: Your incisive commentary really heightens the discussion. Thanks!
shoot, i can't get this dumb browser to leave comments!
Kind of you to notice. ;) Mr.Mouse you seem to have last wordItus.
Don't you have a book to work on?
I guess it is to be expected that someone here would assume that there is a conspiracy going on, namely that I am anonymous. Sorry folks but I am not. And I'm sure Kenny can confirm it because he knows who I am. I'm not sticking up for anonymous viewpoint but just for the fact that it is just a viewpoint that can be considered and then discarded or challenged. As for me I like to consider each subject with an open mind even if it means listening to the other side of an issue without contempt.
I haven’t watched the movie yet but I can say that according to the evidence I've seen, (and I've seen the conspiracy angle stuff also) 911 was not a conspiracy, but how this Administration used it to their own ends is criminal and continues to be.
BTW:I voted for Nader in 2000
I hav'nt watched the movie yet but I can say that according to the evidence I've seen, (and I've seen the conspiracy angle stuff also) 911 was not a conspiracy, but how this Administration used it to thier own ends is criminal and continues to be.
BTW:I voted for Nader in 2000
OOPS, I guess I pasted in a section that was'nt spell checked yet. More evidence that I am not anonymous, because he is much better at the grammer stuff than I.
"911 was not a conspiracy, but how this Administration used it to their own ends is criminal and continues to be."
Well said! I wish I'd said that back in comment #6.
Anyway, it's true, johnnybaffo and anonymous are two different people.
I will assume you said it in comment 6. Valid opinion, I've no problem with that.
If you want a real laugh, Google "Can a jet fuel/hydrocarbon fire collapse a steel structure? An experiment." look at the Democratic Underground post with the pictures of the experiment. It's a classic.
That is pretty good.
super cool drawing i like the eyebrow
Anonymous is obviously a government plant.
Post a Comment