I've met a few heavyweight jazz musicians-Dizzy Gillespie, Marcus Roberts, Sonny Rollins, McCoy Tyner, Herbie Mann, uhhh...Met B.B. KIng after a show (all these are in passing after shows) Partied with Ike Willis a couple times in different states (guitar player for Zappa for years)
Played 3 holes of golf onna photo shoot with Nolan Ryan when he pitched for the Astros.
Met a few rock stars, Met and spoke with Roger Daltrey when I was 11 years old atta Mall record shop in Dallas(1976 NA Tour, last with Kieth Moon) , my mom was standing in line to get her albums autographed, and then when it was her turn, she grabbed Daltrey by his head and hi-jacked him with a wet one, got a picture of that one...Daltrey looked overwhelmed and looked over at me and asked, "That your mum?!"

Most impressive star-saturation came Labor Day weekend, 1975 in Atoka Oklahoma atta 3-day outdoor concert event...camp out-I was 10, found a backstage pass onna chain, and wandered around backstage and on buses with a fuckload of country stars.
Waylon Jennings, Jerry Jeff Walker, can't remember em all, I was a little kid but i remember a lotta musicians tripping on me running around backstage-Some thought I was just a roadie's kid.
Met Jerry Lee Lewis backstage there....

Yeah, suppose the table cloth trick kinna riled us a bit....Nice while it lasted, guess we can dole out love 2 points atta time and live with it...kinna pussified, but OK.

Atta boy pops.

That's one horny baby. 'atta boy.

>> ^Mikus_Aurelius:

So what, we have to accept the legitimacy of leaders who are actively exterminating their own people now? I was against Afghanistan. I was against Iraq. Gadhafi was right in the middle of killing Libyan citizens, those citizens asked for aid, and we decided to help them install a government that won't butcher civilians? How dare we! Sovereignty is a convenient concept for regulating actions between nations. It isn't a moral necessity. This was a case where the moral choice was not the one that respected sovereignty.
I don't see a world in which puppet governments are making us a colonial power, though I won't deny that Bush and Cheney hoped for that. Iraq is now aligning with Iran. Karzai is so far off the reservation that if Afghanistan were Vietnam, we'd have assassinated him twice by now. Most critics of the Libya action are worried that the transitional government is a bunch of Islamists who played nice to get our help and now intend to train terrorists and pick fights with Israel. The truth is that Libyans will probably be a lot friendlier to the US and Europe than they were a year ago. But maybe, for once, that's because we've earned it.
>> ^criticalthud:
I'm a little weirded out too by what just happened in Libya. As much of a fucktard as Gadhafi was, this was yet another leader of a sovereign nation felled by a U.S. and oil-interest-backed coup. No one is really talking about that. Instead, even Jon Stewart is taking an "atta-boy" attitude towards this administration. and relishing in how little it cost.
the next Lybian regime will be a democracy in name only and friendly to US and European interests: light, sweet crude.
Then the IMF will come in under the pretext of "re-building" the country and really fuck the people.
I think we are still a little complacent about our country essentially waging aggressive war.



we have of course, actively supported dictators who have exterminated their own people or violently put down any protests. and we continue to. it's happening right now. The point is, "revolution" in the name of democracy only occurs when US interests are favored. otherwise the US categorizes 'rebellion' or 'revolution'...or even dissent as a terrorist action against a legitimate state. When it favors the US or other high powered interests, "revolution" is simply a pretext for us to topple regimes that are unfriendly to US interests.

So what, we have to accept the legitimacy of leaders who are actively exterminating their own people now? I was against Afghanistan. I was against Iraq. Gadhafi was right in the middle of killing Libyan citizens, those citizens asked for aid, and we decided to help them install a government that won't butcher civilians? How dare we! Sovereignty is a convenient concept for regulating actions between nations. It isn't a moral necessity. This was a case where the moral choice was not the one that respected sovereignty.

I don't see a world in which puppet governments are making us a colonial power, though I won't deny that Bush and Cheney hoped for that. Iraq is now aligning with Iran. Karzai is so far off the reservation that if Afghanistan were Vietnam, we'd have assassinated him twice by now. Most critics of the Libya action are worried that the transitional government is a bunch of Islamists who played nice to get our help and now intend to train terrorists and pick fights with Israel. The truth is that Libyans will probably be a lot friendlier to the US and Europe than they were a year ago. But maybe, for once, that's because we've earned it.

>> ^criticalthud:

I'm a little weirded out too by what just happened in Libya. As much of a fucktard as Gadhafi was, this was yet another leader of a sovereign nation felled by a U.S. and oil-interest-backed coup. No one is really talking about that. Instead, even Jon Stewart is taking an "atta-boy" attitude towards this administration. and relishing in how little it cost.
the next Lybian regime will be a democracy in name only and friendly to US and European interests: light, sweet crude.
Then the IMF will come in under the pretext of "re-building" the country and really fuck the people.
I think we are still a little complacent about our country essentially waging aggressive war.

sweet. now there's just the private security force there that costs about 10x as much per man.
he ended the war. great for the resume. he continued the occupation....no need to talk about it.

I'm a little weirded out too by what just happened in Libya. As much of a fucktard as Gadhafi was, this was yet another leader of a sovereign nation felled by a U.S. and oil-interest-backed coup. No one is really talking about that. Instead, even Jon Stewart is taking an "atta-boy" attitude towards this administration. and relishing in how little it cost.

the next Lybian regime will be a democracy in name only and friendly to US and European interests: light, sweet crude.
Then the IMF will come in under the pretext of "re-building" the country and really fuck the people.

I think we are still a little complacent about our country essentially waging aggressive war.

>> ^xxovercastxx:
"This" is this video. I'll give you one example of dishonesty/ignorance (I'm not sure if they're stupid or lying in this case). As they're showing the map of radar gaps they claim that the locations of the gaps are widely unknown, even to air traffic controllers. If that's true, how is some random dude from Youtube able to show us a map of them? Either the map is made up or he's full of shit about it being a big secret.


Here's the quote:
How should Mohammed Atta and his associates have known the most intimate details of military and civilian radar coverage in the U.S. - details, widely unknown even to air traffic controllers in charge on 9/11? And how should they have known by minute, when their individual plane had reached such a 'radar gap'? Finally: Why didn't the 9/11 Commission even mention this issue?

The video lists the map source in the bottom right hand corner. The map is based on images from a 2002 study at MIT Lincoln Laboratory. The study notes there is "no common integrated air picture" between the FAA and DoD and recommended actions to take to form a "seamless and common air picture".

pdf: http://i-cns.org/media/icns/2002/11/Session_E2-4_Bussolari.pdf
scribd: http://www.scribd.com/doc/18663172/T8-B16-Misc-Work-Papers-Fdr-5202-Briefing-Slides-Surveillance-Implications-of-911-MIT-Lincoln-Lab

If you honestly have questions like this, then you should ask them instead of forming opinions from true ignorance.

Got anything else?

>> ^hpqp:

It's no secret that OBL was trained by the CIA during Russia's invasion of Afghanistan, as a part of the proxy wars between USSR and USA during the cold war.
As for the evidence, you might like to start with the links I've already provided you with. Twice. Oh well, "Third time's the charm" for you superstitious types: http://www.debunking911.com/

_{(Btw, if you're going to defend your questionable beliefs, try linking articles that are a tad more convincing than the conjecturing ramblings filled with leading questions of a Srebrenica-massacre-denialist and defender of a renowned war criminal.)}>> ^marbles:
>> ^hpqp:
Yes, why do truthers keep avoiding the evidence and logic?

I'm not avoiding anything. Please share all credible evidence backing the official theory. No such evidence exists.
And logic? Maybe you should do some research on who Osama bin Laden aka Tim Osman really was.
Osama bin Laden: Made in USA



And it's no secret that al-Qaeda was a database of "freedom fighters" of a CIA proxy army. It's also no secret they were given 6+ billion dollars in the 80s by the CIA and Saudi Intelligence to fight the Soviets over Afghanistan under the invented threat of Communism. Now here's where that "logic" comes in.

When did OBL stop working for the CIA?
OBL was immediately blamed for 9/11 (within a few hours after the attacks) and now we are fighting wars under the invented threat of Muslim jihadists.

Why were some of the alleged hijackers living with CIA and FBI informants?

Why were some of the alleged hijackers training at US military bases?

Why did Anwar al-Awlaki dine at the Pentagon just months after 9/11?

What was ISI Chief Mahmud Ahmad (who wired $100,00 to Mohammed Atta) doing at the Pentagon the week leading up to and morning of 9/11?

Oh, I'm looking for "logical" answers here.

And for "evidence" supporting the official story, don't be a chicken shit. List your best supporting evidence. Of course, I know this is impossible for you. For it would require you to actually construct a coherent argument.
Maybe instead of letting debunking.com do your thinking for you, you should try getting all the facts and confirm them for yourself.

And my "questionable beliefs" are grounded solidly on credible evidence and sound logic, so question away. The link was to an article, not a guy. I'm glad you can google, but if you want to refute the article, try to avoid using logical fallacies (after all).

_{(Btw, "conjecturing" isn't an adjective. You can google that too! It's funny, you keep accusing me of "conjecturing", but you're too much of a chicken shit to demonstrate it!)}

Of course I know you're "not all bad." I am surprised that you would feel the need to say that to me -- I know the difference between a troll who deliberately says things to shock and a guy who makes a bewb joke.

You say not to "take it personally." What am I taking personally? Please explain (that is a real question and I am tired of being told it.) If you could see some of the private messages I have received - believe me, some part of this is meant personally.

I have had private exchanges with the trolls about this. In the trolls' defense, despite my every attempt to be clear about what I am doing, they twist my words and sling them back at me, ascribing motivations and intentions and opinions to me that are 100% incorrect. Some of them are taking this VERY personally. But unfortunately, they are mad at me about this things I don't believe.

So why the heck aren't you telling the trolls to not take it personally?

And excuse me, but why aren't you taking that advice yourself? Your first comment is a personal defense -- "we're not all bad." Sounds like you are feeling the need to defend yourself when I have been very clear what has been bothering me and it ain't you.

I am not angry -- it is so hard to write these emails because there is no tone of voice, and a simple strong declarative sentence sounds harsh. These are real questions, not hypotheticals. I'm asking you -- why aren't you telling the trolls to not take it personally? What is it that I am taking personally?

I normally get messages like this privately and I answer privately. Since you have chosen to send it to me publicly, I am responding publicly. I would have preferred that this personal exchange be.... personal. Oh well.

All these (strong declarative) words and I haven't thanked you yet. Yes, they do need to have their "cock slapped down." Thanks for recognizing that. I do wish that you hadn't led with, excuse me for being blunt, a vagina slap down on me.

I hope you realize that this thing is only continuing because the trolls are the ones continuing it. It can end at any time. I have been very very clear. I will respond to every troll on that site. I contacted them privately so that the trolls could silently fade away and no one would even notice. They chose to engage. Their choice. It is always their choice.

So please don't tell me to stop. It is wasted words, honey. I'm the mom here, Jigga. The trolls were told that if they continued to act badly, there would be consequences. I'm just keeping to my word.

I am sitting here typing this, and I see that rottenseed has just posted something on the sift talk. Do you think it possibly can be that he is leaving me a great and supportive message? That he is finally manning up and doing the right thing, or do you think that he is continuing his childish, defiant behavior? Good god, are trolls boring. (If rotten wrote something sweet, I will come back and gladly apologize. What do you think the odds are that I will be back?)

Five years I have listened to trolling, been uncomfortable and said nothing. I know how it works. Don't engage them, they love a reaction. But Jigga, I got pushed over the edge by specific events, not the general atmosphere. As an educator of both boys and girls (are you? or are you in a private school?), I would think that you would be 100% supportive of standing up to the bullies.

Anyway, I am glad that you ended with an atta-girl. I do appreciate it. I am doing the good work here, even if I have to deal with this every day for the rest of my life.

TL DR: If you choose to give me advice to back down on the sift talk debacle, do it privately not publicly. Otherwise, the comment stream will be messed up with my long responses.



In reply to this comment by JiggaJonson:
I was late to the party on the sifttalk post but I thought I'd drop in and say we're not all bad. That kind of aggressive nonsense can usually be overcome with reason and understanding.

My advice? Q-TIP. quit. taking. it. personally. Attack their arguments, and they'll show their weakness.

That being said, you cant save them all. Every now and again you have to cock slap one of em down. :-D orrrr hmmm maybe a tit job would be more appropriate punishment?

>> ^kronosposeidon:

Civil war in Ivory Coast:
- Chief export: Cocoa
- US response: None
Civil war in Libya:
- Chief export: Oil
- US response: War
These are both current events, BTW. I hate regurgitating the "blood for oil" mantra, but if someone else can offer me a better explanation then I'm all ears. Or as soon as someone says "blood for cocoa" for some other war in the world, then maybe I'll shut up.


The only thing I'd mention is that it's a resource that will draw blood here if we let it destabilize too far (and yes we may cause it). Oil is used in so many things, materially and fuel wise, that it becomes easy eventually to see how there could be lives lost on our own soil due too any number of issues.

But, they won't be flashy deaths. So who cares right? My biggest issue with this so far is that ALL members on the security council have not had a hand in this. Also, remember that Libya is "supposedly" a U.N. abiding nation. Yet they're doing the opposite of what was required by the resolution.

I hate war; I know it will be for money, oil, and gaining footholds. This one I think is correct, but we've abused our leverage with the U.N. a lot. It's nice to see us actually following that resolution.

I have no idea how the congress should be involved (other than an "atta boy" or "you're a terrible Democrat, all hail the Republicans). This was voted upon 50 years ago--basically. While this follows many trends it also skips others; I think I've not fully concluded on where we should be. But, that is why we have our leaders. To make informed decisions and I dearly hope it's true here.

Yummm... cockcheese... thats my favorite.

In reply to this comment by alien_concept:
There is no excuse for my thoughtlessness, you're quite right. Cockcheese.
In reply to this comment by inflatablevagina:
And me, you butthole

>> ^bareboards2:

MIKESHL13!!! I forgot Mikes! We are fellow accountants and love the Daily Show. i forgot to mention her...
Mikes, if you read the comments, you know that better late than never, right?
And taranimator. She's a noobie.
In reply to this comment by alien_concept:
In reply to this comment by bareboards2:
I am still figuring out who has an innie and who has an outie. I'm think Rae is one of the femme crew?
Aren't we marvelous! Issy and Lann and Bea and who else? Smart women all!
Thanks for the atta-girl... And I certainly enjoy your comments on the vids....
In reply to this comment by alien_concept:
Well done you, your vids are generally excellent. What a brilliant addition to the femme crew!
Yeppers, Rae is short for Rachel. Now lemme think; off the top of my head the girls on site are: Issy, Lann, Bea, mintbbbb, laura, UsesProzac, AdrianBlack, LittleRed, ThePinky, annnnd that's all I can think of

There is no excuse for my thoughtlessness, you're quite right. Cockcheese.
In reply to this comment by inflatablevagina:
And me, you butthole

>> ^bareboards2:

MIKESHL13!!! I forgot Mikes! We are fellow accountants and love the Daily Show. i forgot to mention her...
Mikes, if you read the comments, you know that better late than never, right?
And taranimator. She's a noobie.
In reply to this comment by alien_concept:
In reply to this comment by bareboards2:
I am still figuring out who has an innie and who has an outie. I'm think Rae is one of the femme crew?
Aren't we marvelous! Issy and Lann and Bea and who else? Smart women all!
Thanks for the atta-girl... And I certainly enjoy your comments on the vids....
In reply to this comment by alien_concept:
Well done you, your vids are generally excellent. What a brilliant addition to the femme crew!
Yeppers, Rae is short for Rachel. Now lemme think; off the top of my head the girls on site are: Issy, Lann, Bea, mintbbbb, laura, UsesProzac, AdrianBlack, LittleRed, ThePinky, annnnd that's all I can think of

Shouldn't that be "buttholes"? There have been at least four people chiming in on the great women here....

I admit to butt-holiness. I know about you from the great and glorious @peggedbea -- so I stand humbled by your chastisement.

I want company though -- twas not I alone who omitted you from the pantheon!


>> ^inflatablevagina:

And me, you butthole
>> ^bareboards2:
MIKESHL13!!! I forgot Mikes! We are fellow accountants and love the Daily Show. i forgot to mention her...
Mikes, if you read the comments, you know that better late than never, right?
And taranimator. She's a noobie.
In reply to this comment by alien_concept:
In reply to this comment by bareboards2:
I am still figuring out who has an innie and who has an outie. I'm think Rae is one of the femme crew?
Aren't we marvelous! Issy and Lann and Bea and who else? Smart women all!
Thanks for the atta-girl... And I certainly enjoy your comments on the vids....
In reply to this comment by alien_concept:
Well done you, your vids are generally excellent. What a brilliant addition to the femme crew!
Yeppers, Rae is short for Rachel. Now lemme think; off the top of my head the girls on site are: Issy, Lann, Bea, mintbbbb, laura, UsesProzac, AdrianBlack, LittleRed, ThePinky, annnnd that's all I can think of

And me, you butthole

>> ^bareboards2:

MIKESHL13!!! I forgot Mikes! We are fellow accountants and love the Daily Show. i forgot to mention her...
Mikes, if you read the comments, you know that better late than never, right?
And taranimator. She's a noobie.
In reply to this comment by alien_concept:
In reply to this comment by bareboards2:
I am still figuring out who has an innie and who has an outie. I'm think Rae is one of the femme crew?
Aren't we marvelous! Issy and Lann and Bea and who else? Smart women all!
Thanks for the atta-girl... And I certainly enjoy your comments on the vids....
In reply to this comment by alien_concept:
Well done you, your vids are generally excellent. What a brilliant addition to the femme crew!
Yeppers, Rae is short for Rachel. Now lemme think; off the top of my head the girls on site are: Issy, Lann, Bea, mintbbbb, laura, UsesProzac, AdrianBlack, LittleRed, ThePinky, annnnd that's all I can think of