Friday, June 20, 2008

News from Miles

Miles, I do wish you would just go back to sleep and stop trying to scare everyone. There is absolutely nothing wrong with chipping Kids, shutting down criticism, and dragging people out of there homes. Having said that: keep it coming!

Rhode Island:
http://www.naturalnews.com/023445.html


Denver:
http://rawstory.com/news08/2008/06/17/military-choppers-fly-over-denver-during-top-secret-drill/

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2008/jun/17/denver-stocks-up-on-pepper-weapon/

http://origin.denverpost.com/politics/ci9544375

Iowa:
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gMk0eOYOQ-W5ZfDqeZ8NtlJASvmwD91BEGSG0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONAudPPhum8--



1/3 Tazer Victims need medical attention
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/06/17/taser-injuries.html

$12.50 to quote 5 words from AP
http://nielsenhayden.com/makinglight/archives/010341.html

Police Fuel surcharge on Atlanta suburb speeding tickets
http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/energy/2008-06-18-speedingticket_N.htm?loc=interstitialskip

42 comments:

Anonymous said...

Chipping kids???

huh??...wow hate to be the one to say...ooooops mis-spoken again?....ummmm slightly??

I thought the article said backpacks. Conjecture 101 anyone??

Shutting down criticism? What do you mean? Helicopters will aide in shutting down critcism, at the DNC convention?
?!Interesting!?...ready the 50 cal!!!

Dragging people (plural???) out of there homes (plural??). Who was dragged out of there home? and please name all the others (people)making threatening actions towards police officers and rhetorical shackle remarks? He got his wish didnt he?

Are you twisting things again MTJ?

You are a confusing man, to think you have one ounce of education. You like to twist things or you cant read. Maybe you should read your/miles own shit before you post. Why do you always, always do this...man?

See Miles this is what happens when you think like a NUTJOB!!!! hehehe

BIGDOG *shakes head lowly*

Anonymous said...

Gas Prices Are Not Going Up
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEsEvb1WsIY

Anonymous said...

Would you risk your life for gasoline?

http://english.pravda.ru/business/finance/20-06-2008/105545-us_drivers_mexican_fuel-0

Anonymous said...

Thats what i thought....hope the transmiter is working now, oh it is?? Awesome. Care to answer these misrepresentation allegations against you, Mr. Justice files.

Anonymous said...

Lomfl, Lil'Puss. It's not like he edited the reports.

Anonymous said...

Not likely he read them either....LMAO!!!!

BTW...i dont think he is that bright anyways. Im thinking he should get the majority of 69 million to further his ebumakachion...ROFLMAO!!!

Anonymous said...

The only chip my kid would have better stay in his backpack until lunch, then he can eat it.
It makes no difference to me if military gunships mow down every jack-off at the DNC, or the RNC for that matter(in fact, I would enjoy it).
I don't care if a nuclear bomb detonates and drenches my house in radiation, if I want to go in it, I will.
Michael T is probably much smarter than you, Lil'Puss. I only bring that up because you seem to enjoy pointing out how stupid you think he is. Sorry. Maybe you should try to have a point to your argument.

Anonymous said...

I made my point real clear. He needs to learn how to read. Conjectures is his main stay. I only show him his errors and obvious conjectures. To my delight sometimes, i admit. You however are an apologist for the MTunjustice.

Whomever said:

"Michael T is probably much smarter than you, Lil'Puss."

Yeh i can tell from his obvious delusions and misrepresentations. His utter silence shows his embarrasment or hes to stupid to know what he has done.

whomever said:

"I only bring that up because you seem to enjoy pointing out how stupid you think he is."

I guess you understood my point then. Indeed you just made my point clearer within yourself and to think your next sentence shows your apologist nature.

whomever queefed:
"Maybe you should try to have a point to your argument."

Like i said you understand my point and your admission to such just shows how brilliant you are....LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!

BTW atleast Miles has balls enough to stand up for himself and put his name behind it. Who are you again?

LEANDOG slams another unknown scumbag.

Anonymous said...

Oh thats right, your marcus...Pfffffft!!!

Anonymous said...

Oh thats right, you are marcus.

Pfffffffft!! now i remember this dolt.

Anonymous said...

its for the children...

Anonymous said...

1) You are argueing that he has an opinion, not what about what his opinion is. That is dumb.
2) Ignoring you is, by far, the preferred method. I choose to point things out to you in vain hope that you might learn reason.

Why do you act so stupid?

-Marcus, aka Caficho, aka Anne on a Moose, aka Lord of the LilPuss

Anonymous said...

Now you are injecting things i never said. I made my point and i will not repeat it. If your brilliance only takes you to the conclusion im acting stupid. Sir this is no act....lol

However, i noticed how hard it was for you to ignore me. In vain of course...Pfffft!!!!

Nice try....HAHAHAHA!!

Anonymous said...

will you ladies kiss and make up?

Anonymous said...

harry reid comes out of the closet on youtube.

Anonymous said...

So?

Anonymous said...

http://www.itwire.com/content/view/19177/53/

Anonymous said...

Oh look no mention of the BBC special debunking those in the boofers movement. Yes they found those tapes you boofers said showed the BBC involvement in 9-11, wich i mentioned approx 1-2 years ago.

HEY NUTJOBS!!! you have been served. Look it up your damn self. Oh hell why not....LMAO!!!!

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9072062020229593250

BIGDOG

Anonymous said...

I seen it, bigdog.

I found it very interesting.

They tried to do the same stupid shit you do.

"It would have taken thousands of explosive charges" Yet "A few localized core failures, due to fire" is what brought it down.

You can't say that controlled demo would have had to be some huge complex mindfuck, them come back and say fire randomly and evenly weakened a FEW KEY POINTS in the structure.

If fire can weaken a few core points and bring the buildings down, so could demo.

and they "FOUND" the tapes?

OOPS when questioned about the tapes they mysteriously vanish, nowhere to be found...when they want to make a documentary, they are magically on the next damn shelf.

Additionally, when questioned about how BBC got the information about wtc7 ahead of time, they originally didn't want to disclose that it was a wire report..so they tried to play it off as a mistake, and the "conspiracy theories" that they got the information from an outside source was "crazy"......now they come out and admit it, they got the reports of WTC7 from the Reuters wire.

it's interesting how they chopped up the interview with Dylan to make him look like a foulmouth whiner, a couple days before the BBC released their hit piece, Infowars showed the correct information regarding the interview with the guy who was "stepping over bodies"

There is also some question about the timeline the BBC used during his story. Explosions may have gone off at different points in his story, which the BBC piece specifically places the explosions only as he's coming back down the stairs.

Just admit, Bigdog, that the new NIST findings (key localized failures) debunk the CDI's (and your) theory that it would have required thousands of explosive charges.

-Miles

Anonymous said...

This pretty much sums up the BBC's piece.

http://www.911blogger.com/node/16570

-Miles

Anonymous said...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kRaKHq2dfCI

Anonymous said...

Chirp.........Chirp...........Chirp

Anonymous said...

Chirp........Chirp........Chirp

Anonymous said...

Chirp........Chirp.........Chirp

Anonymous said...

.....and the plot of the ISI's role in 9/11 thickens

Why did the man who wired money to Atta meet with Wolfowitz, Feith, Tommy Franks, and the Joint Chiefs, among others, the week of 9/11?

http://911blogger.com/files/DOD_FOIA_response_20-May-08.pdf

Anonymous said...

chirp.......chirp........chirp

Anonymous said...

1 week later, still no response.

Who did you say was served again?
-Miles

Anonymous said...

Wow im just visiting tonight and your lack of patience compounds your ignorance.

I dont need to respond to your idiocies anymore. I dont have the time to slap you around about Jennings and his chopped up interviews with Jones. Maybe later. I even have the correct timeline on this. Doesnt match with the Infowars piece. Does match with the BBC piece if i remember correctly.

You have falsely made claims and i am sick of you boofers. In fact, your bullshit attempt on physics and your lies and twists, just turn me off to any discussion.

The BBC piece i posted was just a back up piece to what i have been saying all along. Take it or leave it. Again they found those tapes over a year or so, maybe longer. So no they didnt just magically appear...nice spin. (Yet another example of your lies)

Your lack of discussion about building number 5 having partial collapse inside, is more ignorance shown, ill gladly point out. (more ignorance and lack of attention)

There was not and still is no evidence showing CD was used. I do know your statement has solidified my position moreso than your strawmen theor"IES"....yes plural.

So are you boofers satisfied with the new NIST findings Miles?

BIGDOG

Anonymous said...

It's been a busy weekend, forgive me for not responding earlier.

First off, you brought up the BBC documentary, I thought that was the topic, what the fuck is this building 5 shit? I don't recall ANYONE talking about building 5. Stay on topic and quit diverting your lack of admission of a failed argument. I haven't read shit on building 5 and I'll still respond by saying that a Partial collapse at ground zero doesn't sound too crazy given the amount of debris flying around there, but building 7 completely crumbled into its own footprint.

I ask again, Which is it, Bigdog? Key joint failures, or would massive explosions have been required?

The BBC tape thing, who cares WHEN they found it...the point is, when they were put on the spot they looked high and low and couldn't find it....then it surfaces months after questions arise

That still doesn't even come close to the fact that they lied about where they got the information.

Satisfied with NIST findings?
No I just find it interesting that explosions "just couldn't have done it" but low temperature fires melt through the welds in the beams.

Obviously after all of their own claims that any explanation they produce would have been unlikely, now they are grabbing at straws at the only probability for that building to crumble. And THATS the strawman.

"your bullshit attempt on physics and your lies and twists"

Who is the one bullshitting physics here? You're the one believing that jet fuel caused a fire crumbling a steel building into its own footprint setting fires in another steel building that crumbled into its own footprint.

What about the Nasa temperature photos? That article you posted a few weeks back stated that they couldn't find witnesses of high temperature shit, did they ask NASA?

Lemme guess, Nasa left the file on the next shelf too?

-Miles

Anonymous said...

While we're getting off topic, Bigdong, Why can't anyone seem to answer the 3 biggest public questions about 9/11?

How did the most expensive military on the planet fail to protect its own headquarters without anyone being held accountable?
(this goes double since they had all of the extra operations in place like Able Danger and the Capitol Super No-Fly zone)

Where is the proof of the Osama connection?

Why isn't anyone in government looking into the ISI wire transfer to Atta, and holding them accountable for "supporting terrorists"?


So that's 4 questions for ya Bigdog, either answer the 4 of them, or admit that a new complete official investigation is needed.

-Miles

Anonymous said...

In the BBC documentary it showed building #5 having a partial collapse inside. Pay attention dood.

You are twisting the fires melting welds. I never claimed this either. You boofers always twist things. The metal itself weakens with heat from fire (forging 101). Just heating a piece of metal by 200 degrees would start the process of weakening its structural integrity.....DUH!!!!

No building fell into its own footprint as you put it, outside it own footprint is evident. For fuck sake dood, we are rehashing this shit. Your babble is pointless and so is my responding to it. If we have to cover the same shit over and over again, then you sir, are a complete idiot.

You tried to gerrymander physics to fit your arguement of wich i easily smacked your dumbass around.

How did other buildings get damaged if they fell in their own footprint. The major damages were done when the buildings fell and heavy debris fell on and into other buildings, outside the said footprint....right??? You even said in previous posts that you didnt say the fell in their own footprint and now you are. Wich is it???

Please point this out: "What about the Nasa temperature photos? That article you posted a few weeks back stated that they couldn't find witnesses of high temperature shit, did they ask NASA?"

Im not sure what you mean. What article? God forbid they found anything as hot as Nasa described. It would literally melt their faces off. Rational thinking anyone???

BIGDONG in jo azz.

Anonymous said...

The second part to your post is questionaing the complacancies of our government. As i have said all along. Discussing rather CD destroyed these buildings is far different from talking about complacancies.

1)How did the most expensive military on the planet fail to protect its own headquarters without anyone being held accountable?

Well Miles if i had an answer i would give it.

2)Where is the proof of the Osama connection?

Their is none. Yet there is a connection through Able Danger and the group Osama leads.

3) Why isn't anyone in government looking into the ISI wire transfer to Atta, and holding them accountable for "supporting terrorists"?

BIGDONG in jo azz




Who within the US wired Atta money??

Anonymous said...

1. I'm not saying EVERY LITTLE SHRED of EVERY building fell straight down, but most of most.

2. Nano-Thermite or an explosion couldn't have caused the "weakening" or caused a fire that caused weakening?

3. I never said that anyone in the US government wired money, I said ISI. Pakistani intelligence. US officials were meeting with General Ahmed (of Pakistan) all that week. The same week that the wire transfer happened.

So I assume since there isn't an answer for 1 and 2, we probably should have a decent investigation into those inconsistencies?

Anonymous said...

I have no problem with the complacancies of any government. In fact i'll encourage it. The less they do, the better off we are. You on the other hand prefere just the opposite. If these guys are as sinister as you think they are, then they could easily manipulate any NEW investigation.

I can also agree with a thorough investigation into these complacancies, you cry foul over. I for one would be interested in Able Danger and its closure. To me that was the real failure in the US armor. Stop Able Danger. You negate the attack.


1)"1. I'm not saying EVERY LITTLE SHRED of EVERY building fell straight down, but most of most."

Then you just admitted to it not being CD. The term footprint describes the safety aspect of CD, so other buildings would be less at risk. That and clearly pointing out the BBC piece i posted explained another huge reason why no explosions were used. Oh you missed that one also.

2)"2. Nano-Thermite or an explosion couldn't have caused the "weakening" or caused a fire that caused weakening?"

This question is rhetorical. Let just say you already made that conclusion. Nano-Thermite....lmao. Ok lets say it was a nano-thermite gig. Then explain to me how this thermite didnt ignite after a huge fire ball errupted in 1 and 2.

Then explain to me how the fires in number 7 didnt cause the nano-thermite to ignite sooner. Oh yeh here we go with the bullshit twists about how they used cell phones and the like. Wich i already disputed. So i wont explain that again.

3)"3. I never said that anyone in the US government wired money, I said ISI. Pakistani intelligence. US officials were meeting with General Ahmed (of Pakistan) all that week. The same week that the wire transfer happened."

So do you have any proof of wrong doing? Are you saying it was very suspicious? Are you telling me they constructed plans to send Atta money? What exactly are you saying Miles? Are you saying Pakistan doesnt have our best interests at heart?

Inconsistencies?? sure why not. would you be satasfied then? i doubt it but amuse me. BTW you are not going to get it. Just to break your bubble....LMAO!!

BIGDONG in jo azz

Anonymous said...

Your preface concludes my main argument, my main concern with 9/11. All I want is an impartial investigation. About the complacence, Thats what Congress is (supposed to be) for, to represent us and put those crooked people in their place.

1) I did not admit to CD, The "conspiracy theory" about Oklahoma city bombing is that not all of them detonated, with photos of bombs being brought out of the building and such. I mean you are the one here pointing out the inconsistencies of wiring and such.
Maybe the "Way to blow up a building" without being traced back isn't perfected. This is the rhetorical argument.

1b.) NOT TO MENTION, if it is a conspiracy, and 3000 people are collateral damage, who cares about a little debris.

2.) I'm not being rhetorical at all on this one...you seen the word nano-thermite and automatically assigned that as my argument and didnt even answer the question. So I ask again, if "Fires" weakened the "Welds" on the "Core Columns" why couldn't an explosion, or a fire caused by an explosion?

2b.)regarding the wiring and your argument of the whole "how did they detonate," I don't know what technologies they have come up with, do you seriously not believe that our defense department could not come up with a charge that couldn't go off by accident? or a timer that doesn't get interfered with?

3.) I'm saying General Ahmed wired money to Atta. Instead of meeting with him and having dinner with him, and letting him return to Pakistan, why wasn't he blocked? Why won't our politicians or media explore a Pakistani involvement into 9/11 (or the fact that the announced hijackers were Saudi..so Saudi involvement)

Instead of exploring real leads, this government has flashed Osama in front of our face constantly, while the only people publicly linked to 9/11 are from allied countries.

I have stated before, that I'm on the fence when it comes to CD. I don't believe in it, I think both theories have inconsistencies....I don't know what happened....I do believe we should examine the possibilities though and as I said, the NIST explanation isn't likely in my mind...and the only thing that makes it likely also makes CD likely. We will never know, Those three questions (Pentagon failures, Osama Proof, and the ISI connection) are my big 3 issues. I could give a shit less about how the buildings crumbled. I just like to point at the unlikely loopholes in the official story. Or when points in the official story contradict the previous arguments against the CD theory.

We keep going round and round about CD, but when it comes to actual provable problems, I agree with you Bigdog, they fucked up. They shouldn't be continuing to seize powers and claiming to "protect" us while escaping true accountability for failing us over and over and over again.

We need true statesmen in the congress, so we can hold an administration accountable for when it's fucked up and when it is downright corrupt. (torture and spying)

Anonymous said...

After thinking of my wording, let me put it this way.

Instead of crumbling apart horizontally, with the path of least resistance, they crumbled vertically down.

Not exactly straight vertically, i know, but more vertical than horizontal for me to believe that the only resistance is the force of air.

Anonymous said...

More classical, in oratory fassion, BS from Miles.

Sorry i recognise your true ignorance in these matters now and how you are playing this i support but i dont support game. You know your playing politics in a sense with a tragic event. Investigation my ass.

You defend/support or expouse their CD rhetoric and nano-thermite (another unsupported claim made by the ousted Jones from BYU) and more. Yet i can see you have failed the 9-11 movement. Instead of backing your rhetoric up. In my mind i have given you enough facts to prove no CD was used. I know, i know, you never claimed this but you expouse its possibility. Afraid you might have to make a stand and be wrong. So you jump all over the place waiting for me to slip up? Playing games with defining physics to make a piont. Twisting comes to mind.

I like facts, personal experiences/skills, peer supported reviews. Speeking of skills. If i was a demolition expert and said these buildings were NOT brought down by demolition, based on my experiences, what would you say then? Yet i give you direction to these experts to evaluate and you knock the BBC expert for his sarcasm, about being a real good terrorist, twisting facts or hows this: "undue use of exaggeration" known as RHETORIC!!!!. Miles you dont want an investigation. All you want is a good reason to bitch. No real evidences, nothing to bring the man down. Yet you expouse the Alex jones, and others, money making movement arguements...whos peers and wife of one i know of, want nothing to do with them.

2)"if "Fires" weakened the "Welds" on the "Core Columns" why couldn't an explosion, or a fire caused by an explosion?"


Before i answer anything please explain yourself.

First off you act as if the welds are the only failures. Maybe you should research more.

"an explosion"

meaning one?

"or a fire caused by an explosion?"

Isnt that what usually happens after an explosion. Theres a fire ball of sort. Are you saying a set (one) device caused the explosion and then the fire weakened the integrity of the effected area resulting in failure?

I want to nail you down so there is NO SQUIRMING!!!

Oh and exactly where did this ONE explosion take place?

Got any science to back this up?

We get past this and we can continue any others. You expouse this rhetoric you best back it up. SHOW ME!!!

BIGDONG in jo azz!!!

Anonymous said...

Well so be it. I believe Miles has called it quits. I knew he would bow to the bigdog. To much rational thought made his brain explode.

Flip

Anonymous said...

Not suprising to me at all Flip. In fact im willing to bet he will never have an answer or a stance. He is finished and so is his cronies.

BIGDONG still n jo boofers azz.

Anonymous said...

Why you're right, There is no using logic against circular logic.

I got what I wanted out of my argument, I got bigdog to admit that there should be an investigation.

I've said before the Controlled Demo really isn't my argument. I don't feel the need to push it through this kind of circular logic.

It's clear from most of Bigdog's arguments that instead of answering my questions and responding to my statements critically, instead he spins and twists my words to attempt to make it sound like I'm saying something else.

Instead of actually responding to if explosions could be in place of the NIST "Fires", he says "one explosion?" trying to make this a word game.

I'm not playing those games. It does service to noone.

-miles

Anonymous said...

Wow talk about turning tail and running.

Flip

Anonymous said...

Yes he is Flip. Yes he is. I ask what he means by "an explosion". Now he says: "Instead of actually responding to if 'explosions' could be in place of the NIST "Fires", he says "one explosion?" trying to make this a word game."

See this shit people Miles wont let me lock him into his own words. Now he changes it to plural...'explosions'. You are a complete tool Miles. The only intellegent thing you have ever said is goodbye.

I have answered you many times. You just dont like the answers.

BIGDONG n jo azz

BTW Flip, why dont you ever call in?