Split Thread Barbra Streisand, Sean Penn, truthers?

[Cicero]

Off topic nonsense again and still no statement or evidence for inside jobber.

Off topic? No. Nonsense? Sure.

Abundant and Compelling Evidence
David R. Griffin, author of "The New Pearl Harbor" and "The 9/11
Commission Report: Omissions & Distortions"


"The authors of this important book argue that Senator Paul Wellstone's death, 10 days before the 2002 elections, was an assassination, most likely ordered by the Bush administration."

http://www.assassinationscience.com/Abundant_and_Compelling_Evidence.pdf

Whom did you suppose Babs figured was responsible for Wellstone's crash that according to her was not an accident.

 

[funk de fino]

Off topic? No. Nonsense? Sure.

Abundant and Compelling Evidence
David R. Griffin, author of "The New Pearl Harbor" and "The 9/11
Commission Report: Omissions & Distortions"


"The authors of this important book argue that Senator Paul Wellstone's death, 10 days before the 2002 elections, was an assassination, most likely ordered by the Bush administration."

http://www.assassinationscience.com/Abundant_and_Compelling_Evidence.pdf

Whom did you suppose Babs figured was responsible for Wellstone's crash that according to her was not an accident.

And again no statement and OT.

 

[Cicero]

I dont blame him for that. But then I am ex military and I know he had no control over that part once it was going. I am accusing him of pre attack incompetence. I know I am not the only one eh?

Babs blames Bush 43 for not shooting down FL 77 because, according to those who don't consider her a troofer, Bush 43 was too stupid.

OT again with massive speculation.

You consider historical documents regarding FDR and info about 12/7 speculative, but when they are documents regarding Bush 43 and info about 911 they are facts? Your trick bag keeps getting larger.

Bush and the admin FUBARED and you know it. If you want to say FDR did as well then knock yourself out. I dont care. All you have here is two wrongs make a right. And no proclamations from Babs yet.

Why are you reticent to say yourself that FDR and his admin "FUBARED?" There is more historical perspective on Pearl Harbor than there is on 911.

Truthers make claims with no evidence and that is exactly what you have done here. I dont care one way or the other whether Babs is a truther or not. You made a claim and have not supported it.

Troofers espouse conspiracies. Believing Babs is one of them based on her comments about Bush 43, 911, and Wellstone's death is decidedly not conspiratorial. For someone who professes not to care whether Babs is a troofer, or not, you sure are defensive about her being considered a troofer especially when some of her comments are simpatico with DRG's comments.

 

[Cicero]

And again no statement and OT.

Talk about sounding like a troother. Babs makes a CT comment about Wellstone and recommends a CTer book, that are both endorsed by the pied piper of the 911 Truth Movement, DRG, and all you can manage is a mantra that is the equivalent of "no steel building had ever collapsed due to fire."

 

[willhaven]

So Cicero. Why is Babs a LIHOPer and not a MIHOPer?

 

[Cicero]

So Cicero. Why is Babs a LIHOPer and not a MIHOPer?

If it makes you happy, consider it a smörgåsbord. Either selection isn't going to give you indigestion.

 

[willhaven]

So you don't know one way or the other.

Me either.

 

[Cicero]

So you don't know one way or the other.

Me either.

Really? She makes a LIHOPer noises about 911 and MIHOPer noises about Wellstone's crash. Is this the most pressing issue of our time? Only to Regnad Kcin.

 

[funk de fino]

Babs blames Bush 43 for not shooting down FL 77 because, according to those who don't consider her a troofer, Bush 43 was too stupid.

So what?

You consider historical documents regarding FDR and info about 12/7 speculative, but when they are documents regarding Bush 43 and info about 911 they are facts? Your trick bag keeps getting larger.

I havent seen any of your FDR documents. I just see your words. I have seen the PDB and the like. As said I dont care about FDR. I prefer to ignore two wrongs make a right arguments.

Why are you reticent to say yourself that FDR and his admin "FUBARED?" There is more historical perspective on Pearl Harbor than there is on 911.

Maybe they did. I do not care. I have not looked into it.

Troofers espouse conspiracies. Believing Babs is one of them based on her comments about Bush 43, 911, and Wellstone's death is decidedly not conspiratorial. For someone who professes not to care whether Babs is a troofer, or not, you sure are defensive about her being considered a troofer especially when some of her comments are simpatico with DRG's comments.

You acting like a truther is not my fault. Bring evidence I will shake your hand and say well done. All I see is your waffle and bias.

 

[funk de fino]

Talk about sounding like a troother. Babs makes a CT comment about Wellstone and recommends a CTer book, that are both endorsed by the pied piper of the 911 Truth Movement, DRG, and all you can manage is a mantra that is the equivalent of "no steel building had ever collapsed due to fire."

Was the CT comment a declaration of inside job 911? If not you are whistling again. Just bring something. It cannot be difficult.

 

[willhaven]

Really? She makes a LIHOPer noises about 911 and MIHOPer noises about Wellstone's crash. Is this the most pressing issue of our time? Only to Regnad Kcin.

Pressing enough for you to continue a thread asserting Babs' LIHOP/MIHOP beliefs without any solid proof.

Insinuate all you want, but you can't know which type of truther (if any) she is.

You may have your best guess, but that's all it is at this point.

 

[Cicero]

Pressing enough for you to continue a thread asserting Babs' LIHOP/MIHOP beliefs without any solid proof.

Are you not continuing it as well? Aside from her overall Bush bashing comments, it is reasonable to conclude Babs is a troofer just from her comments regarding Bush's behavior on 911.

Insinuate all you want, but you can't know which type of truther (if any) she is.

Babs' own words establish her credentials as a garden variety conspiracist. I'm not interested in psychoanalyzing Babs to determine how she became a CTer and why she chose whatever path to her CT delusions. While LIHOP and MIHOP may be tags reserved for 911 troothers, she doesn't escape being a 911 Truth Movement drone just because her brand of trooferism is too slippery for you to figure out.

You may have your best guess, but that's all it is at this point.

Guessing is all that is required for you to conclude Brolin is a MIHOP even though there is no quote of him saying 911 was an inside job. He "insinuates" he is a troofer by asking the audience of The View to check out a 911 website. It seems that guessing and insinuating substitute for "solid proof" when you need it to.

 

[willhaven]

Are you not continuing it as well?

Only in trying to make the point that you can't conclusively determine what Barbara believes because she hasn't made any definitive statements.

Aside from her overall Bush bashing comments, it is reasonable to conclude Babs is a troofer just from her comments regarding Bush's behavior on 911.

She probably is a truther, but in my opinion, making the following statement requires more evidence than you're going on:

Babs is a LIHOP troother and married to a MIHOP troother

Babs' own words establish her credentials as a garden variety conspiracist. I'm not interested in psychoanalyzing Babs to determine how she became a CTer and why she chose whatever path to her CT delusions. While LIHOP and MIHOP may be tags reserved for 911 troothers, she doesn't escape being a 911 Truth Movement drone just because her brand of trooferism is too slippery for you to figure out.

It's not slippery. A reasonable person would be suspicious as to whether or not she's a 9/11 conspiracy theorist. But, at the same time, a reasonable person can't conclude from all you've shown here whether or not she actually is a truther and what flavor of truther she may actually be.

Guessing is all that is required for you to conclude Brolin is a MIHOP even though there is no quote of him saying 911 was an inside job. He "insinuates" he is a troofer by asking the audience of The View to check out a 911 website. It seems that guessing and insinuating substitute for "solid proof" when you need it to.

Even Brolin himself didn't claim to be a MIHOPer, but given what he suggests people read, I would assume he probably is.

The 9/11 site he asks people to go to is a truther website. The book Babs tells people to read isn't necessarily truth movement related. The truthers cling to it because they think those links (many of which are debunked) support their LIHOP/MIHOP claims. From what I've seen of the book and from excerpts you've posted, the book itself doesn't appear to paint a LIHOP/MIHOP picture.

So, for Brolin. He says "look at this truther website!" Babs says, "read this book about shady/questionable connections between the Bush family and the Saudis!" The connection between Babs' reading material and Brolin's isn't as direct.

Is Babs a truther? Quite possibly. Can we conclusively state that she's a truther with as much certainty as we can with Brolin? I don't think so.

 

[DavidJames]

Reaching conclusions:

• Based on cherry picked quotes - Check
• By connecting dots without evidence - Check
• By using someone's political bias as evidence- Check
• Through guilt by association - Check
• By endlessly repeating the same debunked claims - Check
• By thinking evidence is enhanced through font choices - Check

There you have it, Cicero is a truther.

 

[Seymour Butz]

Why does the right always slam Barbra Streisand- the woman is seldom if ever in in the public eye, and rarely gives interviews- she's hardly a vocal advocate like Penn...

Why does the left support her?

 

[DavidJames]

Why does the left support her?

I guess it depends on what you mean by "supporting her". What I've read are people saying the evidence doesn't support the claim. I consider that pretty fundamental skepticism not "supporting her".

In my mind "supporting her" would mean supporting her claims, which I haven't seen, but maybe I've missed it.

 

[Cicero]

From the thread: Plane off course / Where were the fighters?

I don't think this is too far off the mark. No Truther worth his salt is going to believe two pilots conveniently failed to notice they were off course that long, thus providing us government shills with the perfect counterargument. I'd bet money some Truther somewhere will claim this was a set up.

This incident also serves to undermine another loony CT, the one that Sen. Paul Wellstone was murdered by the Bush cabal. The chief backer of this theory is James Fetzer, one of the central pillars of his thesis is that it is impossible that two such "highly qualified" pilots as the one flying the senator could both have lost track of their airspeed to the extent that the plane stalled.

In the real world both pilots were incompetent and far more qualified ones “****[ed] up” on various occasions in the words of a veteran JAL pilot who landed in San Francisco Bay 2 1/2 miles short of the runway!

I debated the crash with Fetzer on two forums and made posts about the relevance of the incident.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=4542&view=findpost&p=173736

For some background info the Wikipedia entry (mostly written by me) is probably the best place to start.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Wellstone#Death

We know Babs says the Wellstone crash wasn't an accident. That makes her a qualified CTer even by JREF conspiracy thread standards. While johnny karate is not referring to the Wellstone crash, the two crashes are similar. I guess johnny karate didn't count on a supposed "non-Truther" to make the same claim about Wellstone's crash.

 

[funk de fino]

From the thread: Plane off course / Where were the fighters?

We know Babs says the Wellstone crash wasn't an accident. That makes her a qualified CTer even by JREF conspiracy thread standards. While johnny karate is not referring to the Wellstone crash, the two crashes are similar. I guess johnny karate didn't count on a supposed "non-Truther" to make the same claim about Wellstone's crash.

It dont matter what they say. It matters what Babs says and you have yet to show anything linking her to a 911 inside job statement.

Wellstone is a deflection again.

 

[Seymour Butz]

I guess it depends on what you mean by "supporting her". What I've read are people saying the evidence doesn't support the claim. I consider that pretty fundamental skepticism not "supporting her".

In my mind "supporting her" would mean supporting her claims, which I haven't seen, but maybe I've missed it.

And I'd guess that since her statements all rely on innuendo, and since she gives support for the writings that do in fact say LIHOP rather than her coming out and saying it herself...... that the left will use this as a "gotcha" moment.

True, her own statements do not directly say "lihop". Therein lies gap for lefties to get their prybar in. Contrast that to hubby. He's out there, so throw him under the bus, even though the overall message is the same.

As I noted earlier, this is a normal reaction to an attack to someone we perceive as being in our group.

No-planers are the crazies (like Brolin) and so they're thrown under the bus, even though the overall message is the same.

The same goes for the idiot birthers. They will thow anyone that shows even a smattering of racist overtones into their rants, even though the overall message is the same.

It's common......

 

[Cicero]

It dont matter what they say. It matters what Babs says and you have yet to show anything linking her to a 911 inside job statement.

Of course it matters. This thread is on the JREF conspiracy forum. Past threads establish inconsistencies about who is and isn't a Truth Movement follower.

Wellstone is a deflection again.

Deflection from what? Do you acknowledge that Babs is a CTer?