11. UFO stands for unidentified flying object, not spaceship piloted by alien lifeform.

Damn winston is crazy as shit.

The only one who had rights under stand your ground? Trayvon Martin, who Stood His Ground against an unidentified armed vigilante and was Executed for it.

You can't start provoke a fight and claim self-defense with these laws. The new evidence showing that Martin fought Zimmerman proves beyond a doubt: Zimmerman is guilty of manslaughter.

Zimmerman had no training, no plan, he was the causative negligent agent whose actions resulted in unnecessary death.

Anyone who can't see why Trayvon had the right under Stand Your Ground that Zimmerman did not, is really lacking upstairs.

Well no, their point is quite clear.

The US government is three to represent the people of it's nation.

Why should multinational corporations be able to buy the their politicians.
Every politician that takes campaign money from unidentified contributors should possibly be tried for treason.

The US government is now run by the multinational oil companies and have been for some time.


But I guess on the point of Witchcraft vs Citizens United, they are not comparing apples with oranges as far as the overriding question goes. I do agree that there are more people that stand behind, trust and support witchcraft and wicca than people that stand behind and support Citizens United.

Doesn't sound like it from the report... well certainly not the high speeds those cars are capable of...

""A group of cars was doing 140-160km/h (85-100mph)," an unidentified eyewitness told Japanese broadcaster TBS.

"One of them spun and they all ended up in this great mess."">> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

Were they racing?

It's obvious some secret government technology to travel between dimensions was tested with a camera to see what was on the other side, but the camera ended up in space instead. Wow, that means teleportation isn't far off

EDIT: And if they've identified it as a Canon camera lens, it's not "unidentified", is it? Less like UFO, and more like IFO.

>> ^Yogi:

SOooo is there a way for me to NOT believe the entire "official" story but not believe crazy conspiracy theories as well? I think there is. I think that the reasons and the hows and whys the terrorists got into the country and hijacked plains is pathetic...what the hell do we have the FBI for anyways?
I think going from that to "conspiracy" is pathetic as well. It's like seeing an Unidentified Flying Object and immediately going "Aliens!" I refer you to Neil DeGrasse Tyson for all other questions...use your brain not your emotions.


Simply saying Bush was in bed with Bin Laden, or the CIA was in bed with him, but the towers went down due to the planes is still what I'd call sane. I think it's contrary to the evidence, but none the less it's not crazy.

What makes the truthers nuts instead of skeptics is not the belief that someone within America was involved, but that they used BOTH the planes and planted explosives.

I see it as the difference between denying the moon landings(crazy) to dismissing them as of no scientific value and a purely military/political stunt.

SOooo is there a way for me to NOT believe the entire "official" story but not believe crazy conspiracy theories as well? I think there is. I think that the reasons and the hows and whys the terrorists got into the country and hijacked plains is pathetic...what the hell do we have the FBI for anyways?

I think going from that to "conspiracy" is pathetic as well. It's like seeing an Unidentified Flying Object and immediately going "Aliens!" I refer you to Neil DeGrasse Tyson for all other questions...use your brain not your emotions.

>> ^ponceleon:

Christ this mentality is absolutely stupid. How do you go from "I don't know what this is" to "I know EXACTLY what this is and it is a flying saucer with aliens in it."


USO? Unidentified Sunken Object?

The key moments are outlined at the start in the text, I suffered through the whole thing but thought it was worth posting it for completeness and context etc.

There is a partial transcript available here: http://www.indymedia.ie/article/99445
[ These transcripts, as well as the recording, were provided to the mainstream media by the Rossport Solidarity Camp. The Gardaí in question were named in the original transcripts. The Irish Times changed the name of the Sergeant to “Garda A” and changed the name of the other Garda to “Garda B”. Rossport Solidarity Camp also decided to remove the names of the Gardaí before publishing here, but changed the Sergeant’s name to “Sergeant” and the other named Garda to “Garda A”, and incorporated this into the video file on Vimeo. Hence there seems to be an inconsistency between the Irish Times transcripts and the Indymedia transcripts, but there is not. “Garda B” in the Irish Times is “Garda A” on Indymedia and Vimeo. ]

Sergeant: “Who is them two lassies, do you know the two of them?
Garda A: “I don’t know the second one, the first one is with blonde hair.”
Unidentified Garda: “She was up on the tractor earlier on.”
Sergeant: “It’d do no harm to get the second one’s name again?
Garda A: “She’s some Yank. I don’t know who the fuck she is.”
Unidentified Garda: “ Is she a Yank?
Garda A: “It sounds like it, it sounds like it, the accent anyway
Unidentified Garda: “Sounds like a Yank or Canadian.”
Garda A: “Well whoever, we’ll get Immigration fucking on her.”
Sergeant: “She refused to give her name and address and told she would be arrested.”
Garda A: “.......and deported”
Sergeant: “And raped.”
Garda A: “I wouldn’t go that far yet….. She was living down at that crusty camp, fuck sake, you never know what you might get.”
Sergeant: “Give me your name and address or I’ll rape you.”
Unidentified Garda: “Hold it there, give me your name and address there, I’ll rape you.”
Sergeant: “Or I’ll definitely rape you.”
Unidentified Garda: “Will you be me friend on Facebook?”

The protest website is here: http://www.shelltosea.com including audio of a second incident in 2006 where the following exchange takes place:
Mr Monaghan: "Do you see the XL on the thing -- that's his mouth."
Garda: "It's my c**k and your f***ing wife will know all about it. I hope you're recording all that now, John."
Mr Monaghan: "Any more comments about my wife?"
Garda: "I don't know the woman.

Here is a documentary covering the protest and police handling:
http://www.rte.ie/news/av/2011/0405/media-2937397.html#

Tags for this video have been changed from 'unidentified, flying, object, evidence, alien, abduction' to 'unidentified flying object, evidence, alien, abduction' - edited by xxovercastxx

>> ^bcglorf:

>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^bcglorf:
>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^bcglorf:
You find it strange that something primarily used for welding was found in the debris of a steel framed building?
>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^bcglorf:
>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^Jinx:
Sigh
While I applaud the experiments with thermite and acknowledge that the official findings of 9/11 probably miss something I think its a stretch to conclude that this was some sort of sabotage. Not only is there no proof, but I also fail to see a motive. Where's the money or power in this? Or do you think elements of your own government conspired to bring down the Twin Towers, hire Saudi's to hijack the planes all to pin it on Saddam for support with an occupation of Iraq? Come on, whip out the razer for this one. Plane hit building. Building collapse. Its not hard.

No proof? How do you explain the thermite particles found in dust samples collected by people who lived by the WTC? Also, hard to get any other "proof" since the rest of the material from the collapse was conveniently whisked away before anyone could do a thorough investigation. Quite convenient if you ask me.

Yes, the clean-up after is the nefarious part.
The bigger cover up is the crashing of airliners into the towers. That act made it look like there were no pre-planted explosives and that the buildings collapsed as a result of the impact and fires. Quite convenient if you ask Duckman33

Huh? I never said anything about pre-planted explosives. I just find it strange that thermite was found in the dust samples...


You know what? Troll someone else pal. I'm not in the mood.

Who's trolling?
The two primary civilian uses of thermite are welding and pyrotechnics. Right?
The WTC towers were steel framed structures. Right?
How is thermite residue entirely unexpected in the rubble when the towers collapsed?

http://www.bentham.org/open/tocpj/articles/V002/7TOCPJ.pdf
Enjoy.

Not particularly enjoyable. Their method for collecting dust was to request dust samples from private individuals years after the collapse? Then they, without explanation, decided to analyze the 4 samples that appeared to have unidentified red chips in them. Oh, and did I mention no effort or explanation for methods of verifying or confirming the origins of the samples save the word of the individuals. Right, some real hard science there. It's worth noting that such gross errors don't normally pass peer review teams, luckily for your crew, the journal they published in is known for peer reviewing anything that passes the $800 submission fee 'test'.
Here's a serious analysis, from PubMed, of the WTC dust. They thoroughly analyze the dust, and they collected it themselves, before it was cleaned up. They also released their findings publicly, years before your crew of committed truthers even requested samples from private individuals.


First, what the fuck is your problem with me? Did I do something to you to piss you off? Secondly, they aren't "my crew". I simply Googled for the information and provided a document link. You seem to have some kind of obsession with making people who don't believe the "official story" look like idiots for some reason. Do you have issues with people who don't believe everything they are told? I'm sorry but the "official explanation" is not very believable to me. If you don't like it, tough shit. Think what you want. Just don't try to make me look like a fucking moron because I have a differing opinion. Which, the last time I checked was MY PREROGATIVE.

>> ^Duckman33:

>> ^bcglorf:
>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^bcglorf:
You find it strange that something primarily used for welding was found in the debris of a steel framed building?
>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^bcglorf:
>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^Jinx:
Sigh
While I applaud the experiments with thermite and acknowledge that the official findings of 9/11 probably miss something I think its a stretch to conclude that this was some sort of sabotage. Not only is there no proof, but I also fail to see a motive. Where's the money or power in this? Or do you think elements of your own government conspired to bring down the Twin Towers, hire Saudi's to hijack the planes all to pin it on Saddam for support with an occupation of Iraq? Come on, whip out the razer for this one. Plane hit building. Building collapse. Its not hard.

No proof? How do you explain the thermite particles found in dust samples collected by people who lived by the WTC? Also, hard to get any other "proof" since the rest of the material from the collapse was conveniently whisked away before anyone could do a thorough investigation. Quite convenient if you ask me.

Yes, the clean-up after is the nefarious part.
The bigger cover up is the crashing of airliners into the towers. That act made it look like there were no pre-planted explosives and that the buildings collapsed as a result of the impact and fires. Quite convenient if you ask Duckman33

Huh? I never said anything about pre-planted explosives. I just find it strange that thermite was found in the dust samples...


You know what? Troll someone else pal. I'm not in the mood.

Who's trolling?
The two primary civilian uses of thermite are welding and pyrotechnics. Right?
The WTC towers were steel framed structures. Right?
How is thermite residue entirely unexpected in the rubble when the towers collapsed?

http://www.bentham.org/open/tocpj/articles/V002/7TOCPJ.pdf
Enjoy.


Not particularly enjoyable. Their method for collecting dust was to request dust samples from private individuals years after the collapse? Then they, without explanation, decided to analyze the 4 samples that appeared to have unidentified red chips in them. Oh, and did I mention no effort or explanation for methods of verifying or confirming the origins of the samples save the word of the individuals. Right, some real hard science there. It's worth noting that such gross errors don't normally pass peer review teams, luckily for your crew, the journal they published in is known for peer reviewing anything that passes the $800 submission fee 'test'.

Here's a serious analysis, from PubMed, of the WTC dust. They thoroughly analyze the dust, and they collected it themselves, before it was cleaned up. They also released their findings publicly, years before your crew of committed truthers even requested samples from private individuals.

Meanwhile, at the uncontacted village, their local government orchestrates an elaborate cover up of the unidentified flying object spotted over their village. It never happened, says the tribal leaders.

Luckily uncontacted tribal warriors, Fox Mulder and Dana Scully are on the case. Are they no longer alone on the back of the eternal turtles swimming through the cosmos? How many turtles down is the universe? And just who is behind this tribal government cover up? THE TRUTH IS OUT THERE

The point is that this is quite arguably NOT 'unjustified' and also quite arguably NOT 'violence'. The other video I linked above has (of course) been ignored. Watch it. The Sift choice above is the aftermath. What brought it on is here...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiLeud-sxrM&feature=player_embedded

Hmm - not quite the innocent little rose, is she?

1. "Unjustified". The video plainly and clearly shows Ms. Kooksalot jumping right up at Paul's car window. No one knows who she is. No one knows what the heck she's trying to do. No one knows what the object in her hands might be. A bomb? A gun? When unidenified persons with unidentified objects and unknown intentions jump at political figures they get tackled and held down by security. She's lucky she didn't get tazed or pepper-sprayed or something more serious. If Ms. MoveOn.Stupid runs at political figures like that then a gentle nudge with a foot should be the least of her concerns.

2. "Violence". I've seen several different shots and angles of this so far and I'll just come out and say it. I've gotten harder 'kicks' from infants. The guy puts his foot on her upper tricep area and kind of gave her a bit of a push. Considering what she did, she got off way easy. If it was me then she'd have been in a full nelson eating asphalt until she was identified.

Here's another angle on the event...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiLeud-sxrM&feature=player_embedded

Now - when an unidentified, unauthorized person makes a mad dash with an object in their hands at a political figure in a vehicle then you sort of have to expect a bit of manhandling. Imagine if some random Bush supporter had made a similar dash at President Obama, for example. You think just maybe that security & aides would dogpile the breach until "the package" was confirmed safe? I'm surprised this nutcase got off as easy as she did.

Also consider the source. This is a MoveOn.org neolib flake with a documented history of radical behavior. As a publicity stunt this loser runs up with a trophy. Whatever. But when that objective fails she runs whining to favorable left-wing media outlets like MSN to peddler her non-story as a "woe is me" tale of Rand Paul violence. And look how freaking HAPPY she is to be on MSN hawking her balony. She's not upset. She's happy as a clam. This went better than she hoped. So boo-hoo cry me a river, toots.

Show me the video of Democrat volunteers wrestling down Republican protesters? Show me the video of Democrat candidates not condemning violence started by one of their own ... one party has a clear propensity for violence, the other does not.

You mean the Democrat party, right? Because they're the main offenders for voter intimidation, violence, and shenanigans. Democrat union thugs intimidate voters at the ballots, and even target them at their homes. Democrat supporters beat up poor black guys at rallies. Rather than condemn the sleaze, Democrat politicians act as apologists for this behavior. And hey - how about that great Etheredge vid where he manhandles a blogger? "Who are you?!?" indeed.

Examples you say?

http://www.frugal-cafe.com/public_html/frugal-blog/frugal-cafe-blogzone/2010/09/29/violence-hatred-and-thuggery-by-liberal-extremists-against-conserva
tives-so-wheres-the-media-video/

And please no whining about the source. Yeah it's a conservative blog, but all its doing is linking youtube videos. Sorry man - but if you imagined up a world where only Repblicans are mean jackholes then you had to do it by ignoring documented fact.