Bill Clinton takes on a heckler

Monica’s ex-boyfriend, Slick Willie Jeff, does a smack-down on one of the dumb-a** 9/11 conspiracy nut bags.

[quote]Bill Clinton takes on heckler
CNN
(video at link)
Watch Bill Clinton take on a heckler Thursday.

(CNN) – Bill Clinton engaged with a heckler head on Thursday at a Denver campaign stop.

The former president had just begun his speech when a man began to shout about 9/11 conspiracies.

As security attempted to escort him out, Clinton stopped his speech, saying, “What are you screaming about? Let him talk.”

“Are you one of those it-was-an-inside-job guys? Let me tell you something…I let you be rude and interrupt me, scream at the top of your lungs. 9/11 was not an inside job; it was an Osama bin Laden job with 19 people from Saudi Arabia,” Clinton continued. “They murdered 3000 Americans and others foreigners, including over 200 other Muslims. And we look like idiots, folks, denying that the people who murdered our fellow citizens did it when they are continuing to murder all around the world. So we heard from you: you go away.”
politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/20 … n-heckler/[/quote]

Also at:

cnn.com/video/#/video/politi … lers.cspan

I love it. Thanks Bill! :slight_smile:
9/11 conspiracy nutjobs truly are the dumbest of the dumb.

bill looked ready for that one. probably knew it had to happen some day lol.

Well, Kerry looked like a rube with Don’t tase me bro’ guy.

ALL of them are ready.

Did you see BIll Maher? “Do we have fucking SECURITY in this building or WHAT!!?” :laughing:

It’s on youtube. Actually, from browsing around in there it looks like old Bill has let quite a few hecklers have it through the years.

ol Bubba’s still got a sharp tongue!

9/11 truthers are the dumbest of the dumb. Big deal, Clinton gave one the smackdown. It isn’t as if they get taken seriously anywhere. Last time i heard a drunk dude run his mouth off about “9/11 was an inside job” the people who had been sitting near him all mysteriously disappeared. Clinton just had to say something because he was on a stage.

At first I was surprised that ABC is labeling the guy shouting as “rioters” (even pluralized :ponder:). Calling people who WANT the truth about 9/11 “nutty, dumb, psychotic, wackos” leaves only worse ridicule for those who DON’T WANT the the truth about 9/11.

But then I remembered who owns ABC.

Disney! Who donated over $600K to G.W. in 2000 and is tethered in partnerships with the Hearst Corporation and General Electric (GE). Let’s not forget their fascinating farce “Path to 9/11”, stretching even further the matrix of 9/11 propaganda.

Actually Bill has no choice but to support the official story of 19 suicide hijackers successfully tricking our half a trillion dollar defense system. Although he’d like 911 truthers to go away, it just won’t happen. The protests will continue to grow because too many people who love America’s original virtues are researching for themselves to only find that truth conflicts with the official 9/11 tale.

[quote]Nothing is so unworthy of a civilized nation as allowing itself to be governed without opposition by an irresponsible clique that has yielded to base instinct.

Who among us has any conception of the dimensions of shame that will befall us and our children when one day the veil has fallen from our eyes and the most horrible of crimes - crimes that infinitely outdistance every human measure - reach the light of day?

But out of love for coming generations we must make an example after the conclusion of the war, so that no one will ever again have the slightest urge to try a similar action. And do not forget the petty scoundrels in this regime; note their names, so that none will go free! They should not find it possible, having had their part in these abominable crimes, at the last minute to rally to another flag and then act as if nothing had happened!

We will not be silent. We are your bad conscience. The White Rose will not leave you in peace!

White Rose leaflets 1 and 4[/quote]

[quote]Many of them, working high in the US government–NSA, FBI, CIA, Pentagon officials—know exactly what happened on 911 but keep quiet. Colluding all the way to the bank. Privately they may not agree with many aspects of the official version but, publicly, they will NOT utter a single statement, will NOT go on record, publicly, with a single dissenting word. Not while there is money to be made. And so, of all the 911 deniers, they are most complicit with the crime. Comfort. Complacency. Cowardice. Conviction. Collusion. And sometimes a combination of all of them.

From a previous thread[/quote]

Taking on a seasoned orator with a mic by shouting ‘Investigate 9/11’ almost begged the smack down. But not everyone trusts Bill, so getting “9/11” and “Inside job” in the same sentence coming form this talking head’s mouth will certainly get more people wondering what’s the commotion all about.
:ponder:
And what topics do American’s find to research into the falsehoods of the official 9/11 tale?

Here’s just a select [url=http://tw.forumosa.com/t/could-this-be-truth-9-11-mystery/35598/38 concerns from another thread[/url]. [quote]Why did the 9/11 Commission fail to investigate and report that their number one ringleader, Mohammed Atta was funded by the Pakistani I.S.I.?

Why was molten metal found in the basement of buildings WTC 1, 2, and 7 up to six weeks after the collapses, when the 9/11 report said the fires never reached temperatures hot enough to melt steel, only weaken it?

Why are all of the official explanations (NIST, FEMA, 9/11 Commission) of the collapses contradictory and mutually exclusive? Why do none of these explanations address the pools of molten metal that were found underneath the rubble of each collapse?

Why didn’t the 9/11 Commission explain the eyewitness testimonies of explosions preceding the collapses of the twin towers?

Why was the sworn eyewitness testimony before the 9/11 Commission by William Rodriguez (“The Keymaster Hero of 9/11”) about explosive devices going off prior to the collapses completely ignored and omitted in the final report?

If Flight 77 was vaporized in the intense fire following the crash, how did it punch into and out of three rings of the Pentagon, leaving a neat round hole in the final exit hole?

If flight 77 was vaporized in the intense fire following the crash, how was it possible to find the human remains that enabled examiners to positively identify the remains of the passengers?

After punching through the final exit hole in the “C-ring” of the Pentagon, how did Flight 77 leave no wreckage?

[/quote]

What about those who HAVE the truth? Isn’t there any ridicule left for us? That seems a little unfair.
I don’t think you and your merry band of nutbags are “nutty, dumb, psychotic, wackos,” by the way. You’re just the lunatic fringe.

j. scholl:
And if one’s aunt had balls, she’d be one’s uncle.
Have you forgotten any vestige of common sense, or was that an ‘inside’ job?

Even facetiously jesting that you have answers to even four of the above eight simplified questions, why do you hesitate to even try?

How someone skips such an opportunity to compliment their retorts reflects confusion or dismay, or both. Without answers, pretending so doesn’t even provide temporary cover.

In addition to the eight questions that have been panzied away from, let’s add:

[quote]Why does the FBI refuse to officially blame Osama bin Laden for the 9/11 attacks?

Since the FBI doesn’t have any hard evidence connecting Osama bin Laden to 9/11, who does?

How would the evidence be so secretive that the FBI can’t use it, yet the US military was allowed to invade Afghanistan based on this accusation?[/quote]

Sandman, while I have every doubt you’ll step up and share any truth regarding any of the questions presented, I’ll try and answer your question.

What do I call those that HAVE truth (evidence, testimony) about the 9/11 planning and execution? Maybe there’s more but three groups stand out: The Colluding Silent, The Whistleblower or The Deceased.

TheGingerMan, I’m not sure about this one, but your sharing what to call a relative when they have a sex change – especially in the absence of a rebuttal – seems appropriate for another thread. Be on your way or step up in sandman’s place and pretend you too have some answers.

Ask Sandy Berger…maybe he has the answer in his socks?

cagle.com/news/SandyBerger/main.asp

gogov.com/bergerwatch.htm

fas.org/irp/congress/2007_rpt/berger.pdf

Oh wait…he’s working for Hilary! now…

Berger now adxising Hilary!

Sandy Berger and the Real Hillary

Disgraced Sandy Berger joins Hillary Clinton campaign

WATCH OUT, SCHOLL! THEY’RE RIGHT BEHIND YOU! :laughing:

sandman, I wouldn’t have guessed a flimsier reply in the face of being called out. Consider doing some research on any of the questions, then come back and make some noise. :neutral:

TainanCowboy-
Yep Sandy Berger got caught lying about stealing classified docs from the National Archives. What information was it (that we know of)?

He removed secret docs from a National Archives reading room prior to testifying before the 9/11 Commission. The documents were five classified copies of a single report commissioned from Richard Clarke, covering internal assessments of the Clinton administration’s handling of the unsuccessful 2000 millennium attack plots.

Remember Richard Clark is the one who said “your government failed you, those entrusted with protecting you failed you and I failed you” before the 9/11 Commission on Mar 24, 2004. This was the guy the White House attempted to discredit. “…specifically, the day after Clarke’s revelations Vice President Dick Cheney went on the Rush Limbaugh radio program to claim that Clarke’s account of the events leading to the 9/11 attacks was not credible because Clarke “wasn’t in the loop” on pre-9/11 counter-terrorism planning, while at the same time National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice was telling reporters that Clarke was the center of all counter-terrorism efforts.

Thus both sides, GOPs and DEMs, desired Clark’s reflections be expunged from the 9/11 Commission. Yet they (and you perhaps) still refer to (and have cheered the recommendations of) that same sham of a report as the “full and complete account of the circumstances surrounding the September 11, 2001 attacks.”

TainanCowboy, WHICH of these questions are even remotely addressed by Clark’s reports?

[quote][url=Could this be truth? 9-11 Mystery - #38 by j.scholl another thread…[/url]

Why did the 9/11 Commission fail to investigate and report that their number one ringleader, Mohammed Atta was funded by the Pakistani I.S.I.?

Why was molten metal found in the basement of buildings WTC 1, 2, and 7 up to six weeks after the collapses, when the 9/11 report said the fires never reached temperatures hot enough to melt steel, only weaken it?

Why are all of the official explanations (NIST, FEMA, 9/11 Commission) of the collapses contradictory and mutually exclusive? Why do none of these explanations address the pools of molten metal that were found underneath the rubble of each collapse?

Why didn’t the 9/11 Commission explain the eyewitness testimonies of explosions preceding the collapses of the twin towers?

Why was the sworn eyewitness testimony before the 9/11 Commission by William Rodriguez (“The Keymaster Hero of 9/11”) about explosive devices going off prior to the collapses completely ignored and omitted in the final report?

If Flight 77 was vaporized in the intense fire following the crash, how did it punch into and out of three rings of the Pentagon, leaving a neat round hole in the final exit hole?

If flight 77 was vaporized in the intense fire following the crash, how was it possible to find the human remains that enabled examiners to positively identify the remains of the passengers?

After punching through the final exit hole in the “C-ring” of the Pentagon, how did Flight 77 leave no wreckage?
[/quote][quote]Why does the FBI refuse to officially blame Osama bin Laden for the 9/11 attacks?

Since the FBI doesn’t have any hard evidence connecting Osama bin Laden to 9/11, who does?

How would the evidence be so secretive that the FBI can’t use it, yet the US military was allowed to invade Afghanistan based on this accusation?[/quote]

Since the docs Sandy Berger has admitted to have stolen don’t include the answers, you still have your golden opportunity to step up to lead the likes of sandman and TheGingerMan to answering these questions that more and more Americans are demanding answers to.

But don’t worry, I’m not really expecting you or yours to back up the cynical scoffs, so take a deep breath and decide if you personally care to someday know the truth about those horrible attacks on 9/11/01.

An uphill battle as it may be, not even name-calling can extinguish the quest for 9/11 truth. Where do YOU fit in to this quest? Probably not someone shouting ‘INVESTIGATE 9/11’ in a crowd who support Bill Clinton, but somewhere on the graph, like everyone else.

There you go. Fixed it for ya.
The flimsiness of the reply is in direct proportion to the flimsiness of the argument.
THEY’RE UNDER THE BED! DON’T LOOK OR THEY’LL GET YOU! THEY’RE SENDING ME RADIO MESSAGES THAT I PICK UP IN MY FILLINGS!

I said it before but will say it again, cut this “this can’t be true because this, this, this, this, this…” bs and come up with some evidence of wrongdoing, and i will be with you, along with major portions of the population no doubt.

Sandman,
WTC 7 impolded.

It wasn’t hit by a plane,

small fires don’t cause 42 story building to collapse at free fall speed !! and then land in a perfect neat pile on its own footprint.

Explain that and until then,

keep tuned in to the media, they will let you know what to think, no need for critical analysis for yourself

What you talking about? I’ve seen explanations for all those things, linked in one of the other fruitcake conspiracy threads. The explanations were plausible and from plausible sources, linked by plausible people. This nonsense about the government doing it (or whoever it is you think did it – I’ve lost track) is not – its a step up from the wild-eyed homeless man ranting to himself and waving his arms about in the street. Actually, no, it isn’t a step up at all.
You guys, whatever you might of yourselves, are no more than the lunatic fringe.

Mick, I find your argument to be inconsistent with the term “critical analysis.” What is your analysis of what actually occured?

from wiki:

As the North Tower collapsed on September 11, 2001, debris hit 7 World Trade Center, causing heavy damage to the south face of the building.[3] The bottom portion of the building’s south face was heavily damaged from debris, including: damage to the southwest corner from the 8th to 18th floor, a large vertical gash on the center-bottom extending at least ten floors, and other damage as high as the 18th floor.[3] The building was equipped with a sprinkler system, but had many single-point vulnerabilities for failure. The sprinkler system required manual initiation of the electrical fire pumps, rather than being a fully automatic system. The sprinkler floor level controls had just a single connection to the sprinkler water riser, and the sprinkler system required some power for the fire pump to deliver water. Loss of power to the fire pump or other damage to the structure would have meant no functioning sprinklers. Also, water pressure was low, with little or no water to feed sprinklers.[26][27]

After the North Tower collapsed, some firefighters entered 7 World Trade Center to search the building. They attempted to extinguish small pockets of fire, but low water pressure hindered their efforts.[28] A massive fire burned into the afternoon on the 11th and 12th floors of 7 World Trade Center, the flames visible on the east side of the building.[29][30] During the afternoon, fire was also seen on floors 6–10, 13–14, 19–22, and 29–30.[3] At approximately 2:00 p.m., firefighters noticed a bulge in the southwest corner of 7 World Trade Center between the 10th and 13th floors which was a sign that the building was unstable and might collapse.[31] During the afternoon, firefighters also heard creaking sounds coming from the building.[32] Around 3:30 pm, given that 7 World Trade Center was unstable and would possibly collapse, FDNY Chief Daniel Nigro decided to halt rescue operations, surface removal and searches along the surface of the debris near 7 World Trade Center and evacuate the area due to concerns for the safety of personnel.[33][31] At 5:20 p.m. EDT on September 11, 2001, 7 World Trade Center collapsed. The building had been evacuated and there were no casualties associated with the collapse.

In May 2002, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) issued a report on the collapse based on a preliminary investigation conducted jointly with the Structural Engineering Institute of the American Society of Civil Engineers under leadership of Dr. W. Gene Corley, P.E. FEMA made preliminary findings that the collapse was not primarily caused by actual impact damage from the collapse of 1 WTC and 2 WTC but by fires on multiple stories ignited by debris from the other two towers that continued unabated due to lack of water for sprinklers or manual firefighting. Structural elements were exposed to high temperatures for a sufficient period of time to reduce their strength to the point of collapse.[6]

The report did not reach final conclusions about the cause of the collapse, but listed several issues requiring further investigation. FEMA made these findings:

Loss of structural integrity was likely a result of weakening caused by fires on the 5th to 7th floors. The specifics of the fires in WTC 7 and how they caused the building to collapse remain unknown at this time. Although the total diesel fuel on the premises contained massive potential energy, the best hypothesis has only a low probability of occurrence. Further research, investigation, and analyses are needed to resolve this issue. [Ch. 5, p. 31.]

Plan view of collapse progression, with structural failure initiating on lower floors, on the east side of the building and vertical progression up to the east mechanical penthouse
Plan view of collapse progression, with structural failure initiating on lower floors, on the east side of the building and vertical progression up to the east mechanical penthouse

In response to FEMA’s concerns, the Commerce Department’s National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) was authorized to lead a three-year, $16 million investigation into the structural failure and collapse of the World Trade Center twin towers and 7 World Trade Center.[34] The investigation, led by Dr S. Shyam Sunder, drew not only upon in-house technical expertise, but also upon the knowledge of several outside private institutions, including the Structural Engineering Institute of the American Society of Civil Engineers (SEI/ASCE), the Society of Fire Protection Engineers (SFPE), the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), the American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC), the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat (CTBUH), and the Structural Engineers Association of New York (SEAoNY).[35]
Few photos and video clips exist that show the damage sustained to south face of 7 World Trade Center on 9/11. From a news helicopter, ABC News captured footage of the south face of 7 World Trade Center, including a glimpse of a gash, extending approximately 10 stories
Few photos and video clips exist that show the damage sustained to south face of 7 World Trade Center on 9/11. From a news helicopter, ABC News captured footage of the south face of 7 World Trade Center, including a glimpse of a gash, extending approximately 10 stories

NIST has released a video and still-photo analysis of 7 World Trade Center before its collapse that appears to indicate a greater degree of structural damage from falling debris than originally assumed by FEMA. Specifically, NIST’s interim report on 7 World Trade Center displays photographs of the southwest façade of the building that show it to have significant damage. The report also highlights a 10-story gash in the center of the south façade, toward the bottom, extending approximately a quarter of the way into the interior.[36][3] A unique aspect of the design of 7 World Trade Center was that each outer structural column was responsible for supporting 2,000 sq ft (186 m²) of floor space, suggesting that the simultaneous removal of a number of columns severely compromised the structure’s integrity.[37] Consistent with this theory, news footage shows cracking and bowing of the building’s east wall immediately before the collapse, which began at the penthouse floors.[3] In video of the collapse, taken from the north by CBS News and other news media, the first visible sign of collapse is movement in the east penthouse 8.2 seconds before the north wall began to collapse, which took at least another 7 seconds.[3][38]

A progress report was released in June 2004, outlining NIST’s working hypothesis.[39][3] The hypothesis, which was reiterated in a June 2007 status update, is that an initial failure in a critical column occurred below the 13th floor, caused by damage from fire and/or debris from the collapse of the two main towers. The collapse progressed vertically up to the east mechanical penthouse. The interior structure was unable to handle the redistributed load, resulting in horizontal progression of the failure across lower floors, particularly the 5th to 7th floors. This resulted in “a disproportionate collapse of the entire structure.”[40]

NIST anticipates the release of a draft report of 7 World Trade Center in 2008.[41] The NIST is utilizing ANSYS to model events leading up to collapse initiation and LS-DYNA models to simulate the global response to initiating events.[42] The investigation of 7 World Trade Center has been delayed for a number of reasons, including that NIST staff who had been working on 7 World Trade Center were assigned full-time from June 2004 to September 2005, to work on the investigation of the collapse of the twin towers.[43] In June 2007, he explained, “We are proceeding as quickly as possible while rigorously testing and evaluating a wide range of scenarios to reach the most definitive conclusion possible. The WTC 7 investigation is in some respects just as challenging, if not more so, than the study of the towers. However, the current study does benefit greatly from the significant technological advances achieved and lessons learned from our work on the towers.”[40]
BMCC’s Fiterman Hall was heavily damaged from the collapse of 7 World Trade Center, and is undergoing deconstruction
BMCC’s Fiterman Hall was heavily damaged from the collapse of 7 World Trade Center, and is undergoing deconstruction

Some conspiracy theorists believe the building collapses on September 11, including that of building seven, were the result of controlled demolition.[44][45] NIST has “found no evidence of a blast or controlled demolition event”. In its final report on building 7, they would “like to determine the magnitude of hypothetical blast scenarios that could have led to the structural failure of one or more critical elements.”[43]

When 7 World Trade Center collapsed, debris caused substantial damage and contamination to the Borough of Manhattan Community College’s Fiterman Hall building, located adjacent at 30 West Broadway, to the extent that the building is not salvageable. As of August 2007, Fiterman Hall is undergoing deconstruction.[46] The adjacent Verizon Building, an art deco building constructed in 1926, had extensive damage to its east façade from the collapse of 7 World Trade Center, though was able to be restored at a cost of US$1.4 billion.[47]

God, it seems pretty obvious now that Sandman is part of the cover up. This conspiracy is deeper and wider than I thought. No time to write - I have to get back to alien-proofing my new apartment (for future reference, I will refer to the alien-proofing as Operation Anti-Anal Probe).
If