Skip to main content

Loose Change or Screw Loose?

I can hardly even watch this. These guys are amazing. (h/t Instpundit)

It *is* just like any other sort of conspiracy theory. It all depends on the truth being hidden from thousands of people. And the only agencies capable of pulling off such a stunt? Huge government agencies.

I guess if you're in the government the saying "two people can keep a secret if one of them is dead" doesn't apply. There were bombs in the world trade centers. They were installed ahead of time. How many man-hours? How many engineers and explosive experts and scientists figured out just where to place those explosives and how many workers humped how many tons of explosives up how many trips in the freight elevators and wired the detonators? And not only was the government able to *find* people who would be willing to do this, none of those people bragged about it over a beer? No one told their husband or wife or lover that they spent the wee hours of the morning installing explosives?

Please tell me, where do these evil and obedient minions exist?

What's more, after doing all of this, instead of just blowing it all up and blaming terroristis (because, obviously, no one would believe that terrorists planted bombs in a building) they managed to coordinate the blowing up stuff with the hijacking of four aircraft, two of which were diverted to some other place and made to disappear, while a fake crater was produced in a field and a missle or something ploughed into the Pentagon, and two aircraft full of people were flown into the world trade center buildings.

Not only is the government all powerful with thousands of those obedient and evil minions to setup this convoluted plan and carry it off without anyone spilling the beans, but this all-powerful entity saw no need to simplify the plan.

I wonder what the Loose Screws think of the secret laboratories built under school buildings in the utility tunnels where children are taken during the day and experimented on by the Air Force. According to the usenet post revealing this, if parents haven't given permission for their children to be involved it might be illegal. The evil and obedient minions... teachers, custodial staff, construction workers, the school district accountants who conceal the extra electricity draw... they never say a word. But I remember when I was a kid, one time I looked through this door at school and there were tunnels with pipes and crap and it was spooky. And you know we were never allowed to actually see what was down there. That's proof they were hiding *something*. And I'm not going to listen to any lies about how it's all normal parts of buildings because everyone knows that pipes and sh*t is built into the space in the floor or walls. If there's a tunnel under a building it *goes* somewhere.

Comments

Ymarsakar said…
When they are in power, you have to wonder what kind of things their devious minds can cook up. Devious plans that fail disastrously perhaps.

Popular posts from this blog

Tyranny.gov vs Tyranny.com

Compulsion is Compulsion, no matter who does it.  This is Brilliant Theft is Theft, no matter who does it. Freedom of Association has no room in it for *private* action   that takes that away Freedom of Association. If I have a business and have voluntary associations such that I choose to serve some people and to not serve others, that might make me a jerk and it might lose me business, it might make me smart and it might gain me business, but it's got to be my choice.  If I would normally serve the current disliked minority in my shop except for the fact that if I'm SEEN to serve them by the wrong people I'll have a private campaign against me as those people do everything possible to ruin me by preventing me from doing business physically or by attacking my customers or suppliers, then I am NOT free to make those choices. Does it really make a difference to losing my CHOICE to voluntarily associate if there's a law that says I may not serve "those people" o...

Don't Look Down by Crusie and Mayer

Not really a review, just wanted to say that I enjoyed this book, _Don't Look Down_ by Jennifer Crusie and Bob Mayer. I went to Amazon to get the link and noticed that it's getting trashed in the reviews by people who have been fans of Crusie's romance novels. I can see why they were upset but I hope she continues to collaborate with Mayer because all I can say is "your loss is my gain." I'm also going to be looking for Mayer's books written as Robert Doherty to check them out. _Don't Look Down_ is a silly novel that had me laughing or trying not to let the kids see I was crying... The laughs weren't belly laughs and the tears weren't heart wrenching sobs... It was just fun. And it *was* a romance. With guns. And knives. And Wonder Woman action figures with matching "wonder wear" underwear. And the items the international terrorist was shipping to the Russian mob boss? Pre-colombian jade penises. At least two people get e...

How "Representation" In Fiction Becomes Toxic

  Some things sound so obviously good that they don't need to be examined.  One of those things is the idea of Representation in fiction; movies, television or books.  Entertainment where some people are conspicuously absent would seem to be an obvious problem, right?  A person doesn't have to be "woke" or any sort of feminist to occasionally watch an old television show and realize (for example) that all the scientists and astronauts in an old movie are men. It's as glaring an anachronism these days as watching a show where everyone is chain smoking cigarettes. Entertainment should reflect the diverse nature of real life and society because, in the end, fiction has to be even more real than real life.  If nothing else, it makes that entertainment more interesting to introduce characters with a variety of backgrounds and challenges. And so we're told that diverse fiction is BETTER fiction. The way that this rather obvious truth is often framed, often discussed...