View Single Post
Old 26th May 2011, 10:27 AM   #9
Penultimate Amazing
Brainster's Avatar
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 18,010
It's Blakeney, not Blackeney. He came across my radar in this video conference when he said (starts around 9:00 in), "Israel's fingerprints are all over 911."
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

This got him some negative attention at 9-11 Flogger, so he began backtracking and explaining what he meant:

To say that someone's fingerprints are all over a crime is not to say they are definitely guilty of the crime. If I had said "Israel was behind 9/11" (as Prof. Truscello misinterpreted my words) I would have been implying that it had been proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Israel did 9/11. I did not claim this. I think most astute readers would not conceive of the two statements cited as being at odds with each other. I think most lawyers and judges would be able to distinguish between someone being guilty of a crime and someone's fingerprints being all over a crime. Sometimes it is the case that the fingerprints are those of the criminal. On other occasions the fingerprints are not those of the criminal.
Anybody able to take a screen cap showing the Facebook link between Blakeney and Smith? I'm still avoiding joining Facebook.
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top