• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

December Stundie Nominations

Travis

Misanthrope of the Mountains
Travis
Joined
Mar 31, 2007
Messages
24,133
It's the season of "giving" so please serve us up some nice juicy December Stundie nominations with extra gravy.
 
Damn, fitzgibbon. you guys are too fast for me. That's a delightful stundie nomination ;)
 
Video stundie nomination?

Can I submit a video stundie nomination?

From the video in this thread
From part 3
"When my proof of a slip up actually is shown to be something that proves the opposite, it then proves my proof is even better than I had originally thought...." :confused:
 
CTer: They do screw up, and on of them did, calling his mother ... Bob Brigham. He calls his mother and he says "Hello this is Bob Brigham."

Host: Actually it wasn't Bob Brigham, it was Mark Bingham.

<explanation to viewers who this is on flight 93>

CTer: Mark Bingham, whatever, yeah, right. That's right. "Hello mother this is Mark Bingham." Uh OK? ... Now, does he usually say that to his mother? Probably not.

Host: Have you been in touch with his mother?

CTer: Nope.

Host: Her name's Alice Hoakland, and she says in fact that was one of the things that they would do on the phone, just kidding, because he was the up and coming young businessman.

CTer: ( :confused: )

Host: And when he called her, she says, that's the way he sometimes introduced himself.

CTer: Well, then that just means that they've done a better job.

It's stundiferous. The guys evidence proved exactly the opposite of what he said, therefore the conspiracy is getting better. Or something.
 
Nice. The classic two-way proof: anomalies are proof of a conspiracy, but the absence of anomalies is proof that the anomalies have been covered up, therefore also proof of a conspiracy. A neat example of the form.

Dave
 
carlitos said:
CTer: They do screw up, and on of them did, calling his mother ... Bob Brigham. He calls his mother and he says "Hello this is Bob Brigham."

Host: Actually it wasn't Bob Brigham, it was Mark Bingham.

<explanation to viewers who this is on flight 93>

CTer: Mark Bingham, whatever, yeah, right. That's right. "Hello mother this is Mark Bingham." Uh OK? ... Now, does he usually say that to his mother? Probably not.

Host: Have you been in touch with his mother?

CTer: Nope.

Host: Her name's Alice Hoakland, and she says in fact that was one of the things that they would do on the phone, just kidding, because he was the up and coming young businessman.

CTer: ( :confused: )

Host: And when he called her, she says, that's the way he sometimes introduced himself.

CTer: Well, then that just means that they've done a better job.

It's stundiferous. The guys evidence proved exactly the opposite of what he said, therefore the conspiracy is getting better. Or something.
Click to expand...

Oh. My.

You can close the nominations for December. Carlitos has a sure-fire winner.
 
carlitos said:
It's stundiferous. The guys evidence proved exactly the opposite of what he said, therefore the conspiracy is getting better. Or something.
Click to expand...


That one has always had that connotation. If you were faking a conversation of that nature, the last thing you'd do would be to have the son contact his mother using his full name like that. Nobody would assume that would be a natural way of speaking. So nobody faking it would do it that way.

[.... Unless that's what they want you to think.... :eek: ]

Rolfe.
 
Rolfe said:
That one has always had that connotation. If you were faking a conversation of that nature, the last thing you'd do would be to have the son contact his mother using his full name like that. Nobody would assume that would be a natural way of speaking. So nobody faking it would do it that way.

[.... Unless that's what they want you to think.... :eek: ]

Rolfe.
Click to expand...

Or, of course, that other possibility, always refreshing - that it was an "easter egg" put there to give a clue to the people who take up those types of clues as to what was really going on...

Or that some beleaguered little cog tried to blow the whistle by leaving us these little bread crumbs...

If you are crazy, you can rationalize anything. :boggled:
 
One more from the above article

John Coker says, "Our government has absolutely taken over this country. We the people don't matter anymore."
Click to expand...

The nerve of the U.S. government for taking over the country.
 
Last edited:
Actually consulting a textbook is so passe:

hoi.polloi said:
So we have discussed the ability for the perps to completely fake the footage and photos of nuclear bomb explosions, but now we must answer other questions.

Imagining we remove the shape of our mushroom cloud from the picture, remaining is:

1. Nuclear "fallout" and poisonous radiation
and
2. The spectral, highly-publicized difference between a nuclear facility and a nuclear bomb

If the hypothesis is that our science is wrong about nuclear bombs, what can we answer about the existence of these two phenomena? My guesses would be so:

1. Nuclear radiation is a series of unstable metals developed under specific laboratory conditions - and which sometimes necessitate NASA-type outer space travel, possibly to "collect" radiation. Any way it is developed, "nukes" are basically just normal explosives with radioactive poisonous metals as shrapnel contained within
and
2. The apparent difference between weaponized radiation and radiation used to heat water in nuclear energy facilities is just that: an apparent media difference which is a contradiction/paradox kept in the public eye in order for people to never grasp that there is no difference


But the joke's on me if my science is just so horrible that all I can come up with is the above.
Click to expand...

http://z6.invisionfree.com/Reality_Shack/index.php?showtopic=57&hl=
 
That one's also getting nominated for the new "Banana" awards, the science and medicine equivalent of the stundies.

Rolfe.
 
Colonel Sanders secretly Muslim??

Colonel Sanders secretly Muslim??

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/...0b#comment-6a00d8341c60bf53ef0120a6d1d741970b

And this sounds like a happy home

This topic opened up a spirited discussion at my house. I speculate that some KFCs may be secretly halal. My mr. dhimmi sez chicken is chicken and it doesnt matter. What matters is the price in money. He sez Now, if they're using it as a marketing tool, well then. . . I said that's ok with you? He said Yeah, because that's the capitalistic way. He thinks 'they' (and he always tells me not to refer to them as 'they' lol) 'they' wouldnt have a KFC which sells halal without disclosing the fact because they would want to use it to help sell to the RoP in the area. He said "Most people don't know what halal means. Your average American doesn't know or care what it means, they're only interested in the price" also, said if he could raise chickens and sell to halal markets he would if the price was right! So--I believe he's one example of an average American. He said my behavior displays paranoia. This is why I post here and vent. This is what we're up against, and me in my own home! I dont care what he thinks of me. I speculate still that halal is being served in a stealth manner in areas still populated by non-muslims (ie not in Detroit area where they proudly proclaim 'halal') Would they do it, what do you think? To me it matters! Oh, and my mr. dhimmi sez the Army just needs to screen for radical muslims like it screens for skinheads. Then all will be ok. (last night i mentioned the name KSM and he said Who's that? to which i said Hello?!? Oh--uh--is that the WTC. . . Yeah!! See he wants to deliberately block it out. It's too hard to deal with) That's the 'wisdom' im listening to here at home :(
Click to expand...
 
Myron Proudfoot said:
Colonel Sanders secretly Muslim??

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/...0b#comment-6a00d8341c60bf53ef0120a6d1d741970b

And this sounds like a happy home
Click to expand...

The scary thing about this, is that absent the paranoia, he has a point. Because KFC is so large, it would make sense to have standardized processing for all of thier food, so I would not be surprised if it is all acceptable under Halal restrictions.

They just don't bother to spend money advertising this fact unless it is an area where people care about that fact.
 
Mmm, not quite sure of the details, but I think that would be illegal in Britain. Permission to undertake the extremely inhumane halal slaughter method is only given to allow Muslims to comply with the dictates of their faith. You don't get to cut animals' throats without stunning them first just because it's convenient.

Rolfe.
 
Rolfe said:
Mmm, not quite sure of the details, but I think that would be illegal in Britain. Permission to undertake the extremely inhumane halal slaughter method is only given to allow Muslims to comply with the dictates of their faith. You don't get to cut animals' throats without stunning them first just because it's convenient.

Rolfe.
Click to expand...

But that sounds similar to Kosher laws as well. Do you know if KFC is certified Kosher in the UK?
 
Gawdzilla said:
How do we know that for sure?
Click to expand...

I linked the video to start at the right time.
Then I made an attempt to paraphrase in the most confusing way possible lol. I'll try harder next time. :(

ETA: TY Carlitos for the transcript :)
NP longfellow
 
Last edited:
Justin39640 said:
I linked the video to start at the right time.
Then I made an attempt to paraphrase in the most confusing way possible lol. I'll try harder next time. :(

ETA: TY Carlitos for the transcript :)
NP longfellow
Click to expand...

Sorry, but The Official Story is automatically discounted. I'll need to know where you were every second for the past eight years before I can consider your story valid. And a DNA sample, please. BTW, have you ever owned a Mannlicher-Carcano?
 
A sure fire defense strategy for KSM over in the 9/11 JREF section:

I have also stated in the past that Dr. Judy Wood has assembled more admissible evidence as to what caused the destruction of the World Trade Center complex (namely a form of directed energy weaponry DEW) than anyone I know of.

That statement remains an accurate description of my viewpoint on the matter.

And, finally, and come to think of it, Dr. Judy Wood could serve as an expert witness for the defense imho. But, given the nature of the defense team; i.e., they are military lawyers, I am highly doubtful of the impartiality factor, let alone the adequacy of counsel factor, let alone still further the everyday awareness that the trials are, as I previously asserted, "show trials" based on the Stalinist model.
Click to expand...



http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=160606&page=3

Judy "Death Star Beam From Space" Woods as a star defense witness. The mind boggles.
 
"Bobanthony" posting in the comments section over at HotAir.com positively soiled himself and then showed it to everyone.

Opie and Dopey are the dumbasses in this, NOT VENTURA And his new show Conspiracy Theory THE BEST TV SHOW EVER! I know one episode does not a series make…but this puts 20/20, Dateline and 60 Minutes TO TOTAL SHAME.

The first show was about something even I have not heard of called HAARP

or High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program.

And just where is this located…ALASKA…YOU LOSE AGAIN PALINBOTS! SHE COULD’VE STOPPED THIS DANGEROUS DEVICE FROM DESTROYING THE WORLD, BUT NOOOOOOOOOO! ALL SHE WAS DOING WAS BEING A NEOCON LIKE YOU HERE AT HOTAIR!

BobAnthony on December 2, 2009 at 10:55 PM
Click to expand...
 
Over at ATS JPhish comment on Penny Eglas's testimony:

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/single/7650721.html

I claimed that pterdine and the unreliable website he referenced her from, presented no reliable evidence that she was a real person.
Click to expand...
What website he's calling "unreliable"?

http://americanhistory.si.edu/september11/collection/supporting.asp?ID=30


Si.edu = Smithsonian Institute and her testimony is one of many found in the September 11, 2001 collection
http://americanhistory.si.edu/september11/collection/

Penny Eglas is one of the many witnesses to the crash of Flight 77 at the Pentagon.
http://americanhistory.si.edu/september11/collection/supporting.asp?ID=182
 
Last edited:
Breaking news from the Reality Shack: Tiger Woods cheating on his wife is really a government psyop:

Simon Shack said:
Most likely the big media hype around sultry "Rachel Uchitel" and her alleged affair with Tiger Woods is but the latest psyop to attract new attention to the "WTC VICTIMS"... The perps are now resorting to recycling their old 'heartbreaking' 9/11 stories. In the process, they weren't even able to produce a "Rachel Uchitel" remotely resembling "blonde-holding-her-missing-boyfriend's-pamphlet". Pretty lame, really.
Click to expand...


http://z6.invisionfree.com/Reality_Shack/index.php?showtopic=63&view=findpost&p=768262

What a strange situation. If the current 'Rachel Uchitel' is an actor masquerading as a vicsim-backstopper (what an odd concept to contemplate), it is still possible Tiger had an affair with someone. If this news item is to be believed, his wife, Elin, just forced him to sign a much more lucrative prenup.
Click to expand...


http://z6.invisionfree.com/Reality_Shack/index.php?showtopic=63&view=findpost&p=774708
 
carlitos said:
CTer: They do screw up, and on of them did, calling his mother ... Bob Brigham. He calls his mother and he says "Hello this is Bob Brigham."

Host: Actually it wasn't Bob Brigham, it was Mark Bingham.

<explanation to viewers who this is on flight 93>

CTer: Mark Bingham, whatever, yeah, right. That's right. "Hello mother this is Mark Bingham." Uh OK? ... Now, does he usually say that to his mother? Probably not.

Host: Have you been in touch with his mother?

CTer: Nope.

Host: Her name's Alice Hoakland, and she says in fact that was one of the things that they would do on the phone, just kidding, because he was the up and coming young businessman.

CTer: ( :confused: )

Host: And when he called her, she says, that's the way he sometimes introduced himself.

CTer: Well, then that just means that they've done a better job.

It's stundiferous. The guys evidence proved exactly the opposite of what he said, therefore the conspiracy is getting better. Or something.
Click to expand...

Having watched the video, I think this idiots' point is that Mark Bingham introducing himself to his mom was a slip-up, but that the conspirators were able to lean on his mom to say this was normal.

It's still a great stundie, but at least not a complete non-sequitur, akin to answering "llama" or something.

McHrozni
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom