Jane!

zed !

dang !

Destructomatch!

read every post on libby trial @fdl – (i’m addicted!)

I’m getting tired of… crossing my fingers, listening to accordian tunes and wearing this lucky purple anorak.

Thanks to rocket scientist and raven for the help with the images.

rocket scientist – http://www.michaelyon-online.c…..e-girl.htm this was the one. many thanks!

fzfzfzfzffzfzfzfzfzffz fitz. Sorry for spraying everybody, I was too late anyways.

# 10

follow your son’s flight to Denver on flight tracker.
help jet land in snow flurries.

Oh please let it be soon! I’m home recovering from foot surgery and have waaaay too much time to obsessively check on you! Your work has been fabulous, concise, amusing, informative. Good job all around.

Well, I’ve been saying that if it isn’t today, it’ll be Friday. It’s looking like it’s not today.

Maybe we need a cyber chant, typed/sung only by those of us on line outside the courthouse. An FDL prayer?

The gods/goddesses are obviously playing with us, and we may have to sacrifice one or more rabid lambs in atonement — or at least a troll or two.

The longer that it takes to receive a verdict, is the conventional wisdom that it’s better for the defense than the prosecution?

i.e. closer to a hung jury, or a jury making sure every “I” is dotted and “T” crossed?

#9 – Unselfishly log off FDL to spare the servers for a while please.

#8 – Log back on FDL (sorry)

Two threads? no waiting? Peterr’s thread is live now too.

others want to run down the hall screaming at Fox News that the verdict’s in.

Don’t do that: the moment they announce it is the cue to start bombing Iran.

Okay, Marcy,

While we’re waiting for your account of meeting and speaking with Patrick Fitzgerald, I have one question: Does he now know that you are the only other person on the face of the earth that probably knows as much about the CIA leak case as he does?

Thank you again for all your hard work, and the wait goes on!

-S

On the one-in-a-million chance that they finish at five on the nose, we’ll get the verdict today, right? Right?!

Strategerie @ 16

Okay, Marcy,

While we’re waiting for your account of meeting and speaking with Patrick Fitzgerald, I have one question: Does he now know that you are the only other person on the face of the earth that probably knows as much about the CIA leak case as he does?

Thank you again for all your hard work, and the wait goes on!

-S

Yes, please tell us about it — before your battery runs out!

At this point, with convictions on the first two counts, the only real issue is whether Libby beats count three, before the jury turns to four and five and convicts on those. Then we will have to wait to see whether Walton stays the sentence pending appeal. If he doesn’t, look for Scooter to squeal, as Bush won’t dare pardon him until November 5, 2008

Oo! Got tell Fox Noise that Libby was acquitted! That should be fun.
For Shuster, try Nyquil, DayQuil, Nyquil, Dayquil. And vick’s vaporub.

List or listen to every recorded piece of American music pertaining to breaking the law:
1. I fought the law and the law won;
2. That’s the sound of the men working on the chain-gang;
3. Lawyer Clark (Sleepy John Estes)
4. Vioila Lee Blues (Cannon Jug Stompers)

etc. etc…Ya know, the power of positive thinking

FiniFiniTOOBZ! @ 15

Two threads? no waiting? Peterr’s thread is live now too.

My dad had pens made for his law practice that said: “Two briars. No waiting.”

briar = from the briar patch = hillbilly

My guess is that they have made up their minds but want to go home and sleep on it before calling it a verdict in the morning. They want to be out of there by noon so they can all go have lunch together and then have a weekend free of the trial.

As for things to do, I’d vote for giving Faux Noise a faux heads up that the verdict is coming and see what happens.

Jane, Some of us imagine who will star in the Movie Version. I think that Uma Thurman could play you. Sam Shepherd would make a great Fitz although he is a tad old.

# 1: Chatting up the special prosecutor in the hallway. Sweet

Dru @ 6

I’m getting tired of… crossing my fingers, listening to accordian tunes and wearing this lucky purple anorak.

Green! You were supposed to wear the green one!!

mayan @ 22

List or listen to every recorded piece of American music pertaining to breaking the law:
1. I fought the law and the law won;
2. That’s the sound of the men working on the chain-gang;
3. Lawyer Clark (Sleepy John Estes)
4. Vioila Lee Blues (Cannon Jug Stompers)

etc. etc…Ya know, the power of positive thinking

Add The Authority Song by John Mellencamp

Libby Trial, Day 6:

The day began with a question from the blue-jean clad Jury which the judge didn’t understand. The Jury said, “Whatever.” On other fronts, Marcy forgot her power cord, but struggled on with Jane’s computer. Jane, bedecked in Valentines Day Dress, fishnets and designer shoes met with Fitz and others while eating un-named delicacies handing out Marcy’s book. The power stayed on all day. Blog comments were wide ranging and laced with estrosterone and vaguely acknowledged restlessness.

Nada from the Jury by 4:45 PM.

T minus 15 minutes and counting…

#10 go buy another UPS to replace the one I blew with the space heater today.

#9 Imagine what it is Marcy and Fitz talked about since she’s being coy about it.

Can’t wait to hear all about your talk with Fitz!

Got any jury vibes? I know it’s late in the day, but we’re all hoping! I think it will be this Friday.

I thought FOX News already knows everything? Tell Pach to stifle the urge to help those Fox terrorists. *s*

Top 10:

Stroll down the hall from the media room and look at the Teapot Dome Scandal documents, next to the empty display case. I maintain the empty one is awaiting Libby trial documents.

And if you’re REALLY bored, new shiny at egblog. More about my time with the senator and some insights into Byron York. No, I swear they’re not related. Just a product of an ADHD mind jumping from one topic to another.

I think we could tell Faux News, “Dewey Beats Truman” and they wouldn’t fact-check it.

But, but, but egreg- what green one? I didn’t hear about a green one!

egregious @ 33

Top 10:

Stroll down the hall from the media room and look at the Teapot Dome Scandal documents, next to the empty display case. I maintain the empty one is awaiting Libby trial documents.

Maybe that’s where they’ll enshrine the Aspens letter.

Whatever number: Practice Boy Scout knot technique on laptop power cord

Mason @ 243

Here’s my take on the jury’s question. The issue isn’t whether Libby lied to Cooper; the issue is whether Libby lied to the FBI.

The outcome of this count necessarily depends on the FBI agent’s testimony regarding what Libby said about his conversation with Cooper. Did Libby lie to the FBI when he told the agent that he told Cooper that reporters were telling the administration that Mr. Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA but that he (i.e., Libby) did not know if this was true (i.e., that Mrs. Wilson worked for the CIA). The jury should find him guilty on this count, if they decide that he lied to the FBI about what he said to Cooper. They should acquit, if they decide that he truthfully recounted what he said to Cooper even if he lied to Cooper.

Cooper disputed Libby’s recollection of their conversation. Don’t forget what Cooper disputed: He disputed what the FBI said Libby told them about the conversation. If the jury believes Cooper told the truth about what Libby told him and the jury believes that the FBI agent told the truth about what Libby said about that conversation, then the jury should convict Libby on Count III.

Make sense, or did I mess it up even more?

There’s a bit more to this. Libby also asserted to the FBI that not only did he say the above to Cooper [Statemade made], but that this conversation supported his position that AT THE TIME he did not “recall” that Wilson’s wife was a CIA employee [content of statement itself].

So he was not only lying about what he [said] to Cooper…he was also lying to the FBI about his knowledge at the time [content].

Thus the juries question
Page 74 of the jury instructions, “Count three of the indictment alleges that Mr. Libby falsely told the FBI on October 14 or November 26, 2003, that during a conversation with M. Cooper of Time Magazine on July 12, 2003, Mr. Libby told Mr. Cooper that reporters were telling the administration that Mr. Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA but that Mr. Libby did not know of this was true. (i.e., is the charge that the statement was made or about theh content of the statement itself)

I think Libby is screwed any way one parses this.

Option 1- If Libby MADE the statement then he is lying to THE FBI about his belief at the TIME he spoke to Cooper that he did not recall Cheney telling him about Valerie Wilson working at the FBI. This is the conclusion whether or not he made the statement to Cooper. He was, in this parsing, only using the conversation with Cooper to support his assertion about “forgetting”. If he didn’t forget…then he lied to the FBI by not saying that he lied to Cooper. Libby was using the Cooper conversation as factual support to his assertion that he “forgot”. This doesn’t require believing Cooper at all.

Option 2) Libby fabricated the details of the conversation with Cooper out of thin air. Again, this would support the assertion that he “forgot”. But if the jurors believe Cooper, then Libby lied to the FBI about the content of the conversation.

Either way, Libby seems to be screwed IF the jurors have already resolved that Libby didn’t “forget” the Cheney conversation.

Spunkmeyer @ 13

The longer that it takes to receive a verdict, is the conventional wisdom that it’s better for the defense than the prosecution?

i.e. closer to a hung jury, or a jury making sure every “I” is dotted and “T” crossed?

I don’t see that a jury that has been out this long will ever acquit on all five counts. The best case scenario for the defense on this case is a jury that hangs on one or more, but not all, counts, and convicts on the others. Time is not the defense’s ally here.

Spunkmeyer @ 13

The longer that it takes to receive a verdict, is the conventional wisdom that it’s better for the defense than the prosecution?

i.e. closer to a hung jury, or a jury making sure every “I” is dotted and “T” crossed?

Not necessarily. I don’t think this has yet passed into the “it’s been going on too long” category, especially when you look at how the “note” question wound up getting resolved by the jurors themselves. It sounds to me like they are working carefully through all the charges, including the various conversations that don’t carry a specific charge, but which Fitz argued are relevant to the various charges…

…She said, genuflecting to a plaster Virgin Mary while crossing herself and fingering her rosary….

#11 – printing maps that the person who did the work should have printed already. Then trying to figure out what’s wrong with the work they did.

Actually, Tylenol, crackers and Gatorade sounds like it might be good for a cold. Fever relief, light food, electrolytes and fluid. (I’d prefer salsa burritos to crackers, but it would require going out to find a microwave.)

Dru @ 35

But, but, but egreg- what green one? I didn’t hear about a green one!

Damn. Ok who was responsible for sending out the memo on lucky colors?

doodle funny outfits over line drawings of Babs Comstock.

inmymind’s eye @ 7

Thanks to rocket scientist and raven for the help with the images.

rocket scientist – http://www.michaelyon-online.c…..e-girl.htm this was the one. many thanks!

It’s all so very tragic and sad.
I can’t believe Bush lied the whole world into this hell!

Come on jury! Time to begin to make it right!

egregious @
23

FiniFiniTOOBZ! @ 15

Two threads? no waiting? Peterr’s thread is live now too.

My dad had pens made for his law practice that said: “Two briars. No waiting.”

briar = from the briar patch = hillbilly

I liked the sign on my lawyers desk.

“Presumption of innocents begins upon receipt of retainer.”

If it takes Pach to go home early to get a vedict, let him go!

For all the latest Libby trial news, legal documents, timelines and other essential materials surrounding the Bush administration’s outing of covert CIA operative Valerie Plame and its politics of payback against Joseph Wilson, see:
“The CIA Leak/PlameGate Resource Center.”

Tim @
9

# 10

follow your son’s flight to Denver on flight tracker.
help jet land in snow flurries.

Glad to hear I’m not the only person that does this.

Me, I’ve been distracting myself with new books.

Christy, I took your advice and picked up David Coe’s first book (not the one you linked to) and while it does have some “first book” issues, it’s good. I look forward to reading more!

Oh, and work. Yeah, I’m supposed to be doing that, too.

Marcy,

[…] Fitzgerald, I have one question: Does he now know that you are the only other person on the face of the earth that probably knows as much about the CIA leak case as he does?

I suspect Marcy would be first to admit that she knows far less about hte case than Fitz. Hey, he knows stuff that ONLY he and his team know. So let’s say, “Marcy probably knows MORE than anyone on da planet except for Team Fitz.

After all, Fitz having aces up his sleeve – isn’t that what we’re all counting on and hoping for?

Jury went home for the day. We’ll see you tomorrow…

Done for the day. sigh…

Me, I’m just listening to Randi Rhodes streaming (that sounds somehow dirty…) and wiring a recording studio.

Thus, I’m making a living while I wait for the Good News.

You know, “Guilty”.

Not the other kind of Good News. Eww.

I got a job!!!!! Finally, I can send my share to the kibble bowl!!!! First paycheck I’m hitting that button up there!
I heart FDL…

Jane Hamsher @ 51

Jury went home for the day. We’ll see you tomorrow…

They left early?

I have a couple of pens that say ‘This pen stolen from the law office of…’

(Me, I’m watching the footy.)

cgreen @ 26

# 1: Chatting up the special prosecutor in the hallway. Sweet

Ding ding ding!!!
We have a winner.

Jane Hamsher @ 51

Jury went home for the day. We’ll see you tomorrow…

Dang.

Jane Hamsher @ 51

Jury went home for the day. We’ll see you tomorrow…

Arrrrrggggghhhhhhh. But at least I don’t have to keep refreshing…as often.

scarecrow @ 12

Maybe we need a cyber chant, typed/sung only by those of us on line outside the courthouse. An FDL prayer?

The gods/goddesses are obviously playing with us, and we may have to sacrifice one or more rabid lambs in atonement — or at least a troll or two.

Oh heck no! No sacrificing rabid lambs.
How about an effigy of something? Something really easy to sculpt with sculpy?

Shopgirlove @
54

I got a job!!!!! Finally, I can send my share to the kibble bowl!!!! First paycheck I’m hitting that button up there!
I heart FDL…

Congratulations, Shopgirlove. At least we had some good news today!

Shopgirlove @ 54

I got a job!!!!! Finally, I can send my share to the kibble bowl!!!! First paycheck I’m hitting that button up there!
I heart FDL…

Congrats shopgirl!

Yay shopgirllove!

Frank Probst @ 55

Jane Hamsher @ 51

Jury went home for the day. We’ll see you tomorrow…

They left early?

Maybe they have to press their verdict clothes.

mayan @ 22

“Lawyers, Guns & Money” Warren Zevon

“Breaking the Law” Judist Priest

I can only wear my lucky underwear so many days in a row.

JPL @ 25

Jane, Some of us imagine who will star in the Movie Version. I think that Uma Thurman could play you. Sam Shepherd would make a great Fitz although he is a tad old.

LOVE Sam Shepard and his sexy deep voice!
Perfect!!!!

Frank Probst @ 55

Jane Hamsher @ 51

Jury went home for the day. We’ll see you tomorrow…

They left early?

I’m going with “good night’s sleep, verdict in the morning, out by lunch”. It’ll be Jury Suit Watch tomorrow morning.

Shopgirlove @ 54

I got a job!!!!! Finally, I can send my share to the kibble bowl!!!! First paycheck I’m hitting that button up there!
I heart FDL…

Congrats, Shopgirlove!

Maybe they left early thinking they can wrap it up fairly early tomorrow. Just one more night to “sleep on it.” (Ughh…must stop speculating….now…)

Will Marcy have a post tonight to tell us something/anything about her chat with Fitz?

Also her lunch companions?

Millineryman @ 64

Frank Probst @ 55

Jane Hamsher @ 51

Jury went home for the day. We’ll see you tomorrow…

They left early?

Maybe they have to press their verdict clothes.

Hey Jane,

Maybe a jury fashion would be in order. Perhaps they will dress up when there’s a verdict coming…?

Give FDL’s servers a break and go read Jerilyn’s description of the nuts ‘n bolts of the jury’s deliberations.

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2007/2/28/142518/176

Libby trial comments are welcome to continue here, and the Two Georges thread is still going downstairs.

Also, early beer-thirty means more precious minutes for Jane to get herself a new Verdict Day Outfit.

I don’t want to be pessimistic, but are the people on this jury awake and breathing? How long does it take to find an elephant in a 10′x10′ room?

Yea, though I walk through the valley in the shadow of death, please deliver us from evil!

I heart every last one of you..thank you!
Oh no! If I have a job how do I follow the verdict? Oh no!

Michael Jones @ 76

I don’t want to be pessimistic, but are the people on this jury awake and breathing? How long does it take to find an elephant in a 10′x10′ room?

Yea, though I walk through the valley in the shadow of death, please deliver us from evil!

Or deliver us from weasel.

I’m recommending that tomorrow the guys wear fishnets. That’ll ge the Jury working…

Mickey @ 79

I’m recommending that tomorrow the guys wear fishnets. That’ll ge the Jury working…

Or fishheads.

Ouch! Peterr starts a thread about our disappearing rights and his thread disappears. I’m hoping it is the fdl mods who did this, not AbuG’s minions.

I agree with the they left early because they are ready to wrap it up in the morning views. Please…

Shopgirlove @ 77

I heart every last one of you..thank you!
Oh no! If I have a job how do I follow the verdict? Oh no!

Congratulations! Do you start immediately?

egregious @ 63

Yay shopgirllove!

wrong reply but…

I thought my family was the only one to use briar as a hillbilly

Millineryman @ 64

Frank Probst @ 55

Jane Hamsher @ 51

Jury went home for the day. We’ll see you tomorrow…

They left early?

Maybe they have to press their verdict clothes.

Iron the GUILTY decals onto their verdict sweatshirts……

Shopgirlove @ 53

I got a job!!!!! Finally, I can send my share to the kibble bowl!!!! First paycheck I’m hitting that button up there!
I heart FDL…

Shopgirl… congrats! I’m next, send me some karma!

Verdict tomommow, I betcha.

Guilty 4 counts.

It’s my contention that the jury actually finished deliberating this morning after their question was answered, but are waiting til tomorrow to deliver the verdict so that they can all wear their nice clothes. ;)

Here’s a little tempting food for thought from David Shuster..at least I’m lovin’ the way he’s thinking.

run down the hall screaming at Fox News that the verdict’s in….

Why not be really nasty?! Whisper it furtively, just close enuf to be heard by the right fellas, then dash outside & whip out phones …. or whatever works … ;->

Maybe they’re going to iron patch some diagonal lines over their heart T’s.

FiniFiniTOOBZ! @ 15

Two threads? no waiting? Peterr’s thread is live now too.

Where did Peterr’s thread go?? I just tried to go back to it and it wasn’t there.

logorrhea – I like your contention. Can’t wait to see what they wear tomorrow!

pseudonymous in nc @
68

Frank Probst @ 55

Jane Hamsher @ 51

Jury went home for the day. We’ll see you tomorrow…

They left early?

I’m going with “good night’s sleep, verdict in the morning, out by lunch”. It’ll be Jury Suit Watch tomorrow morning.

Hmmm, I wonder if my dentist’ office will accept “must wait on jury” as an excuse to cancel tomorrow morning’s appointment without 24 hours notice.

If not, could ya’ll please not post anything about the verdict before about 2pm? After all, spoilers are impolite!

P J Evans @
41

Actually, Tylenol, crackers and Gatorade sounds like it might be good for a cold. Fever relief, light food, electrolytes and fluid. (I’d prefer salsa burritos to crackers, but it would require going out to find a microwave.)

Brondo’s got what plants crave. It’s got electrolytes.

You can always do my Fitz-Scooter Trial Crossword Puzzle.

WARNING: It is very challenging.

Mickey @ 79

I’m recommending that tomorrow the guys wear fishnets. That’ll ge the Jury working…

In the thread below, in response to a question about what would be appropriate “Let’s Celebrate!” attire, I signaled my intent to dance around the house in my birthday suit (and to salute the oncoming lunar eclipse at the same time).

No one said anything in response.

So maybe fishnet stockings would be ho-hum, too?

[Of course, my fear is that everyone just let it slip by silently because the image is too horrible to imagine…]

;-)

:-)

Something to ponder while we wait:

The BBC has apparently lost all of its archived footage from Sept 11, 2001.

Two days ago, 9-11 researchers uncovered archive footage that showed the BBC had announced the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 at 5:00 PM EST. The reporter and graphics claimed the building had collapsed.

Only problem, it was still on the Manhattan skyline. The building didn’t actually fall until 5:20 PM EST.

The government claimed it fell due to fires (it was not hit by an airplane). It fell at virtually free-fall speed, about 7 seconds.

How did the BBC know the building would accidentally collapse 20 minutes before it did, unless there was some sort of source that knew it would fall around that time?

This is a smoking gun that 9-11 needs to be reinvestigated and that the conspiracy is much wider than the mainstream media indicated, namely the 19 hijackers.

Video can be viewed here

The BBC has tried to have this pulled from Google and YouTube during the last two days. Why? Why have they claimed to no longer have their original archives?

This is a very big story.

mayan @ 22

List or listen to every recorded piece of American music pertaining to breaking the law:
1. I fought the law and the law won;
2. That’s the sound of the men working on the chain-gang;
3. Lawyer Clark (Sleepy John Estes)
4. Vioila Lee Blues (Cannon Jug Stompers)

etc. etc…Ya know, the power of positive thinking

All the criminals in their coats and ties
are free to drink martinis and watch the sun rise
while Rubin sits like Buddha in a ten foot cell
an innocent man in a living hell
- that’s the story of the Hurricane
but it won’t be over till they clear his name
and give him back the time he’s done
put in a prison cell but one time he could have been the champion of the world……
-Hurricane
b.dylan

in this case I’d like to see a guy in a suit and tie not clear someone’s name

I don’t know about the fishnets, though I’ll bet Pach has the legs for them.
But you guys really should develop as distinctive look. What the heck does a firedog look like anyway? I’m imagining a hat with floppy ears made of fluttering orange and yellow silk.
Hey! Maybe you can set up a FireDogLake T-shirt and paraphenalia stand outside the courtroom. Have Marcy do an official book signing.

Michael Jones @ 76

I don’t want to be pessimistic, but are the people on this jury awake and breathing?

Judging by the quality of the questions they asked during the trial, at least some of the jurors are
wide awake. They’ve had hours and hours of testimony to wade through without tripping over any Bright Shiny Objects. If they’ve made it all the way to the charges related to Cooper, they’ll probably be finishing up Real Soon Now.

SteveAudio @ 72

Millineryman @ 64

Frank Probst @ 55

Jane Hamsher @ 51

Jury went home for the day. We’ll see you tomorrow…

They left early?

Maybe they have to press their verdict clothes.

Hey Jane,

Maybe a jury fashion would be in order. Perhaps they will dress up when there’s a verdict coming…?

Prison stripes might be appropriate.

logorrhea @
88

It’s my contention that the jury actually finished deliberating this morning after their question was answered, but are waiting til tomorrow to deliver the verdict so that they can all wear their nice clothes. ;)

By now, they have to know there is a news cycle to capture as well. Why would they leave early unless they were done? Unless they are at a natural stopping point, like between counts. I think I’ll set the Left Coast alarm early tomorrow, just in case….

Tannen @
67

JPL @ 25

Jane, Some of us imagine who will star in the Movie Version. I think that Uma Thurman could play you. Sam Shepherd would make a great Fitz although he is a tad old.

LOVE Sam Shepard and his sexy deep voice!
Perfect!!!!

Sexy, deep voice = Sam Elliott.

Some beef…yum.

logorrhea @
88

It’s my contention that the jury actually finished deliberating this morning after their question was answered, but are waiting til tomorrow to deliver the verdict so that they can all wear their nice clothes. ;)

I CAN LIVE WITH THAT (if it’s a guilty verdict)

Try this link again (typo in my earlier attempt?)

OK, I guess it is gone . . . hmmm . . . was it something I said?

ohioblue @ 93

logorrhea – I like your contention. Can’t wait to see what they wear tomorrow!

Neither can I!

BTW, I’m also Blue in Ohio.

I agree with Litigatormom that there is nothing to be read into the amount of time the jury is taking. You’ll read whatever you want into it anyway, but that doesn’t mean you should.

congratulations Shopgirl

why did they leave early? Why? Why? Why?

The tell all line:

After further discussion, we are clear on what we need to do. No further clarification needed. Thank you. We apologize.

It is my contention that this was the last bone of contention.

Jury comes back before noon tomorrow.

Guilty on 4 counts.

Hi pups

I’m enjoying this thread, and peterr’s “Tale of Two Georges”, and surfing the comments…

and now this lovely thread continues, yet the Tale of Two Georges is erased.

the best of times, the worst of times…

Shopgirlove @ 77

I heart every last one of you..thank you!
Oh no! If I have a job how do I follow the verdict? Oh no!

Mazel Tov Shopgirlove!!

If you don’t have to report to your new job until next Monday, well we should have a verdict in by then fersure. You may have trouble following the IMPEACHMENT hearings while at work later, but that’s a good sorta problem, n’est-ce-pas? :)

Aldon @ Orient Lodge says this:

Strike that: It is now reported that Judge Walton had a five o’clock meeting and sent them home early.

I’d link to him but his servers crashed the other day…

oh and congrats Shopgirlove!

inmymind’s eye @ 7

Thanks to rocket scientist and raven for the help with the images.

rocket scientist – http://www.michaelyon-online.c…..e-girl.htm this was the one. many thanks!

Since you had some trouble with your search you may appreciate some coaching. I use lots of different search engines. I probably have somewhere between 50 and 75 search engines listed among my favorites. I use the window on my upper toolbar rather then the window of a specific search engine. This way I don’t have to reenter the search criteria as I change from search engine to another. I have 9 search engines readily available in the pull down menu from the upper right hand window of the toolbar. In this particular case since you were after a photo I selected Snap as my first search engine. I think the keywords I used were soldier child iraq and photo. The benefit of using the Snap search engine is it shows you the photo in a right side window as you scroll down through the URLs that are listed as possible answers. If you are not familiar with Snap, try it. I am sure you wil like it and will include it along with the other search engines you use.
http://www.snap.com/

Any sign of the Comstock-Toensing bullshit brigade whispering that if Scoots is acquitted on one or two charges, it’s not really a conviction?

I’m recommending that tomorrow the guys wear fishnets.

The Rocky Horror Fitzmas Show?

Feels like fitzmas eve… time to light a fire and sleep fitfully until we can open our presents, or perhaps find coal in our stockings.

Congrats to Shopgirl!!!

not on look alikes but for drama value/sam elliott for fitz, jodie foster for jane, harvey keitel as scooter

Wil @ 110

why did they leave early? Why? Why? Why?

Maybe one of the jurors wanted to leave a few minutes early to attend a school function for his/her child. Maybe they finished with one count and wanted to stop before going on to discuss the next one. Who knows?

I should add that there has been extensive discussion of the BBC World Trade Center footage over on 9-11 blogger for those interested in it.

So many interesting stories to follow at the moment!

portia.vz @ 28

mayan @ 22

List or listen to every recorded piece of American music pertaining to breaking the law:
1. I fought the law and the law won;
2. That’s the sound of the men working on the chain-gang;
3. Lawyer Clark (Sleepy John Estes)
4. Vioila Lee Blues (Cannon Jug Stompers)

etc. etc…Ya know, the power of positive thinking

Add The Authority Song by John Mellencamp

Don’t forget:
“Mama Tried” Merle Haggard and
“Folsom Prison” Johnny Cash

LBrowne @ 120

Wil @ 110

why did they leave early? Why? Why? Why?

Maybe one of the jurors wanted to leave a few minutes early to attend a school function for his/her child. Maybe they finished with one count and wanted to stop before going on to discuss the next one. Who knows?

damn them

No offense to the jury… but what is their problem? 8 people or so said he lied, his lie served his own needs….

As for waiting for the possible verdict tomorrow? I’ll be trying to teach my high school students algebra and trig all day. Attempting to deal with the ridiculous ‘no child left behind’ rhetoric. Another of the Bush fab legacies. ;0)

FDL Q’nA

First commentor of the day asks a question: Like “Who stopped Joseph McCarthy?”

The first person to say Joseph N. Welch gets to ask the next question, like “Who outed Nixon’s White House Tapes?“

Unanswerable questions like “What’s Jane wearing?” not allowed…

A scooter fell in a well. Additional coverage on this breaking story at 6:00.

logorrhea @ 88

It’s my contention that the jury actually finished deliberating this morning after their question was answered, but are waiting til tomorrow to deliver the verdict so that they can all wear their nice clothes. ;)

You beat me to it. If they are dressed up in the morning, we’ll know to stick close to fdl.

Mickey @ 126

FDL Q’nA

First commentor of the day asks a question: Like “Who stopped Eugene McCarthy?”

The first person to say Joseph N. Welch gets to ask the next question, like “Who outed Nixon’s White House Tapes?“

Unanswerable questions like “What’s Jane wearing?” not allowed…

Do you mean Joseph McCarthy?

So what happens when a player makes a boo-boo like this? Goes to the back of the line?

kirk murphy @ 112

Hi pups

I’m enjoying this thread, and peterr’s “Tale of Two Georges”, and surfing the comments…

and now this lovely thread continues, yet the Tale of Two Georges is erased.

the best of times, the worst of times…

Hey, no plagiarizing from Dickens.

randiego @ 86

I’m bouncing buckets of karma your way! Your next, I promise.

I think I start on Moday…I won’t know until tomorrow. Please, kind, wonderful jury people, please.

Thank you everyone, I have to go a rehearsal so until tomorrow!

Who stopped Eugene McCarthy? Has this been answered? Bobby of course.

Could Hubert have entered the primaries and defeated McCarthy? Or, more likely, at the convention had Bobby not entered the race? Probably. Everything was back room with cigars then.

Get Clean For Gene!!!

Nixon tapes: Paul Butterfield?

Mrs. K8 @ 129

Mickey @ 126

FDL Q’nA

First commentor of the day asks a question: Like “Who stopped Joseph McCarthy?”

The first person to say Joseph N. Welch gets to ask the next question, like “Who outed Nixon’s White House Tapes?“

Unanswerable questions like “What’s Jane wearing?” not allowed…

Do you mean Joseph McCarthy?

So what happens when a player makes a boo-boo like this? Goes to the back of the line?

boo-boo? moi?

It has been a long day, hasn’t it?

mui @ 130

kirk murphy @ 112

Hi pups

I’m enjoying this thread, and peterr’s “Tale of Two Georges”, and surfing the comments…

and now this lovely thread continues, yet the Tale of Two Georges is erased.

the best of times, the worst of times…

Hey, no plagiarizing from Dickens.

No need to plagiarize. If we’re talking about Little Boots, the quote should be “It was the worst of times. Period.”

After reading Egblog, I had to find out what Louboutin was–here are some green ones:

http://www.mycatwalk.com.au/pa…..in_16.html

Oh, I definitely think someone should run down the hall and shout the verdict is in. Best one I’ve heard all day!

Nancy Drew @ 128

logorrhea @ 88

It’s my contention that the jury actually finished deliberating this morning after their question was answered, but are waiting til tomorrow to deliver the verdict so that they can all wear their nice clothes. ;)

You beat me to it. If they are dressed up in the morning, we’ll know to stick close to fdl.

Here is a question: where is Cheney scheduled to be tomorrow?

mui @ 130

kirk murphy @ 112

Hi pups

I’m enjoying this thread, and peterr’s “Tale of Two Georges”, and surfing the comments…

and now this lovely thread continues, yet the Tale of Two Georges is erased.

the best of times, the worst of times…

Hey, no plagiarizing from Dickens.

Please, we call it “research.”

(h/t to Tom Lehrer)

Woodhall Hollow @ 133

Nixon tapes: Paul Butterfield?

And his Blues Band.

I for one intend to spend my time contemplating Jane’s hosiery and footwear. Maybe I’ll write her a song.

I predict March will roar in like a lion with guilty verdicts all around !

I think that they are all trying to understand the case in all it’s details so that they can write a book called “Anatomy of Deceit” ;-)

Little do they KNOW!

mui @ 130

kirk murphy @ 112

Hi pups

I’m enjoying this thread, and peterr’s “Tale of Two Georges”, and surfing the comments…

and now this lovely thread continues, yet the Tale of Two Georges is erased.

the best of times, the worst of times…

Hey, no plagiarizing from Dickens.

sorry -

I’ve been getting my resume ready for the New York Times.

Apologies for spilling that skill-set near the Lake.

Woodhall Hollow @ 133

Nixon tapes: Paul Butterfield?

Close but no cigar. Alexander Butterfield.

peterr’s tale of two georges is back up top

The only reason I care about a Libby guilty verdict is the possiblilty ‘guilty’ will lead to indictments of “higher-ups”.

Woodhall Hollow @ 132

Nixon tapes: Paul Butterfield?

Nixon sure got the blues after that info came out.

Mrs. K8 @ 140

Woodhall Hollow @ 133

Nixon tapes: Paul Butterfield?

And his Blues Band.

Haha! My age is starting to show…

Mrs. K8 @ 140

Woodhall Hollow @ 133

Nixon tapes: Paul Butterfield?

And his Blues Band.

Oops. It just occurred to me that this might be a non-snarky question.

In which case, the answer is “Alexander” — Not “Paul.”

Monsieur Le Prof @ 121

I should add that there has been extensive discussion of the BBC World Trade Center footage over on 9-11 blogger for those interested in it.

So many interesting stories to follow at the moment!

It seems now there were several live news reports on 9/11 that reported WTC7 collapsed up to an hour or so ahead of time.

Evil Parallel Universe @ 108

I agree with Litigatormom that there is nothing to be read into the amount of time the jury is taking. You’ll read whatever you want into it anyway, but that doesn’t mean you should.

One thing that the jury no doubt is considering is the gravity of the verdict in a case that involves the VP’s right-hand man obstructing justice. I imagine they will want to be absolutely sure that the evidence backs up the verdict on each count – all elements.

Will they wake up Bush to tell him the verdict? They didn’t bother to after the Cheney assassination attempt.

Woodhall Hollow @ 133

Nixon tapes: Paul Butterfield?

Alexander Butterfield, iirc

bookwoman @ 89

Here’s a little tempting food for thought from David Shuster..at least I’m lovin’ the way he’s thinking.

Interesting thing in that video clip with Shuster. In the middle he says something like, “The prosecution’s supporters…” feel that Count 3 would be the toughest one to convict on. That was ew’s and the general consensus here this morning, so makes me think he was talking about FDL as the prosecution supporters. Who else would that be? Just random people around the courthouse? Don’t think so…

I wonder if this is another example of FDL/liberal blogs gaining more traction. We’ve always been used to the Pox News “Some people say…” meaning Drudge, Wash Times, or just made-up people, influencing news coverage. Could it be we’re getting to that point slowly but surely as far as influencing news coverage???

mack @ 146

peterr’s tale of two georges is back up top

Right here. Really. I’m sure this time.

In which case, the answer is “Alexander” — Not “Paul.”

Same general time period, ie, I get to invoke the memory defense!

LS @ 151

Monsieur Le Prof @ 121

I should add that there has been extensive discussion of the BBC World Trade Center footage over on 9-11 blogger for those interested in it.

So many interesting stories to follow at the moment!

It seems now there were several live news reports on 9/11 that reported WTC7 collapsed up to an hour or so ahead of time.

I’m surprised that the BBC didn’t report that it collapsed 4 hours later than it actually did. I mean I’ve seen the time-stamps on their broadcasts!

kirk murphy @ 144

sorry -

I’ve been getting my resume ready for the New York Times. Apologies for spilling that skill-set near the Lake.

Kirk Murphy, If you are apologizing for the quote, don’t. I was kidding. It somehow reminded me of a post The General did a while back (in honor of Ann coulter?)

bonkers – great catch! I think you’re on to something.

Nancy Drew – There’s a lot to go through, to discuss. I think most juries take their responsibilities seriously. And, I don’t believe their thinking about the potential repurcussions of a guilty verdict on Chimpco. I think they’re just looking at the specific charges and the evidence. But that’s me.

Peterr’s post is missing. He is the type of commenter that makes me almost think about going to Church, but somehow here north of Atlanta it seems doubtful.

Mrs. K8 @ 1:59 pm -

(…and to salute the oncoming lunar eclipse at the same time).

Although it may not be visible in Arizona, go ahead and celebrate it anyway; the most recent total lunar eclipse occurred in late October 2004.

I’ll be listening, Jane!!! folks! if you haven’t hit refresh, jane is on Rachel Maddow’s Air America show at 6;30 this evening.

mui @ 159

kirk murphy @ 144

sorry -

I’ve been getting my resume ready for the New York Times. Apologies for spilling that skill-set near the Lake.

Kirk Murphy, If you are apologizing for the quote, don’t. I was kidding. It somehow reminded me of a post The General did a while back (in honor of Ann coulter?)

Thanks mui – that’s very kind of you.

No worries!

As it happened, I was just settling down to channel Steno Sue and Jason Blair.

Eureka Springs, AR @ 109

congratulations Shopgirl

Seconded.

JPL @ 162

Peterr’s post is missing. He is the type of commenter that makes me almost think about going to Church, but somehow here north of Atlanta it seems doubtful.

It’s back, and thanks for the kind words!

cinnamonape @ 158

LS @ 151

Monsieur Le Prof @ 121

I should add that there has been extensive discussion of the BBC World Trade Center footage over on 9-11 blogger for those interested in it.

So many interesting stories to follow at the moment!

It seems now there were several live news reports on 9/11 that reported WTC7 collapsed up to an hour or so ahead of time.

I’m surprised that the BBC didn’t report that it collapsed 4 hours later than it actually did. I mean I’ve seen the time-stamps on their broadcasts!

Ha ha! Actually they’re five hours ahead, not four. Yes, the timestamp for the WTC 7 collapse was initially 21.54, or 4:54 PM EST, meaning it was a full 26 minutes before the building fell.

Given that no steel-reinforced building had EVER collapsed due to fire (and it wasn’t hit by a plane) their foreknowledge is a damning piece of evidence that 9-11 may have been, along with shadowly terrorists, an inside “Executive Branch” job.

[warning: shameless blog whoring]

just thought the following tidbit might be amusing to all good plameologists.

it betrays a lot about cheney, his attitude, his relationship with the press, and the press’ mindless stenography, even while being openly played like fiddles …

dick cheney, sock puppet

it’s a short read, since the referenced article plainly speaks for itself.

Freepress @
24

My guess is that they have made up their minds but want to go home and sleep on it before calling it a verdict in the morning. They want to be out of there by noon so they can all go have lunch together and then have a weekend free of the trial.

As for things to do, I’d vote for giving Faux Noise a faux heads up that the verdict is coming and see what happens.

I hope you are right that they are just dotting “I”s and crossing “T”s. I can’t take another weekend and if it goes into the weekend, I would venture to say that we are heading into hung jury territory.

We are no one week into deliberations and nothing?!?!?!? Arrrgghhhh!!!!

politicalpolyanna @ 65

mayan @ 22

“Lawyers, Guns & Money” Warren Zevon

“Breaking the Law” Judist Priest

“Send lawyers, guns and money…uHH…the shit has hit the fan.”

Shopgirlove @ 130

randiego @ 86

I’m bouncing buckets of karma your way! Your next, I promise.

I think I start on Moday…I won’t know until tomorrow. Please, kind, wonderful jury people, please.

Thank you everyone, I have to go a rehearsal so until tomorrow!

Shopgirl -see how that works?? My most recent interview just called… second interview tomorrow at 1pm! Yes!

Hey, no plagiarizing from Dickens.

Yeah, who do you think you are? Joe Biden?

aarrgghh @ 169

[warning: shameless blog whoring]

just thought the following tidbit might be amusing to all good plameologists.

it betrays a lot about cheney, his attitude, his relationship with the press, and the press’ mindless stenography, even while being openly played like fiddles …

dick cheney, sock puppet

it’s a short read, since the referenced article plainly speaks for itself.

Is this a case where Cheney “leaked on himself?”

Can you clarify? Did Walton meet with the jury before they left for the day? Or did he have some other meeting and they jury left (two separate events)?

If Walton did meet with the jury, would this mean that they will announce the verdict tomorrow?

aarrgghh @ 169 – that is funny. And pathetic. We’ve been abused by these monsters for so long now, that they don’t seem as pathetic as they are. But watch Rove shrink. Watch Cheney shrink. God I hope everyone sees them for what they are. I hope the husks crack and people seem the slime molds beneath.

My own mother told me, “I took George and Laura off of my fridge!”

There is hope yet.

There’s no shame in whoring blogs!

http://www.rochelletimes.blogspot.com

[Mod Note; Yes there is.]

Notta Flatlander @ 172

Hey, no plagiarizing from Dickens.

Yeah, who do you think you are? Joe Biden?

Mr. Bigstuff?

Shopgirlove @ 77

I heart every last one of you..thank you!
Oh no! If I have a job how do I follow the verdict? Oh no!

Tell ‘em you can’t start the new job until there’s a verdict in the Scooty Libby trial. (That’ll fuck ‘em up! They’ll have no idea what the hell you’re talking about!)

chaboard @ 94

pseudonymous in nc @
68

Frank Probst @ 55

Jane Hamsher @ 51

Jury went home for the day. We’ll see you tomorrow…

They left early?

I’m going with “good night’s sleep, verdict in the morning, out by lunch”. It’ll be Jury Suit Watch tomorrow morning.

Hmmm, I wonder if my dentist’ office will accept “must wait on jury” as an excuse to cancel tomorrow morning’s appointment without 24 hours notice.

If not, could ya’ll please not post anything about the verdict before about 2pm? After all, spoilers are impolite!

Tell them you have “jury duty”. It is your duty as an American to be intensely concerned with what the jury decides in this case. Your airtight alibi!

logorrhea @
88

It’s my contention that the jury actually finished deliberating this morning after their question was answered, but are waiting til tomorrow to deliver the verdict so that they can all wear their nice clothes. ;)

I hope they DO have a verdict (guilty of course). But I also hope that you are wrong that they actually care about wearing “nice clothes” to deliver a verdict. I would hate to think such a vain jury was deliberating this important case.

Mrs. K8 @ 97

Mickey @ 79

I’m recommending that tomorrow the guys wear fishnets. That’ll ge the Jury working…

In the thread below, in response to a question about what would be appropriate “Let’s Celebrate!” attire, I signaled my intent to dance around the house in my birthday suit (and to salute the oncoming lunar eclipse at the same time).

No one said anything in response.

So maybe fishnet stockings would be ho-hum, too?

[Of course, my fear is that everyone just let it slip by silently because the image is too horrible to imagine…]

;-)

:-)

Birthday suit party at Mrs. K8’s house!

karelroc @ 181

logorrhea @
88

It’s my contention that the jury actually finished deliberating this morning after their question was answered, but are waiting til tomorrow to deliver the verdict so that they can all wear their nice clothes. ;)

I hope they DO have a verdict (guilty of course). But I also hope that you are wrong that they actually care about wearing “nice clothes” to deliver a verdict. I would hate to think such a vain jury was deliberating this important case.

They may anticipate being interviewed after the verdict and want to be thought “serious people,” especially after the t-shirt silliness.

clueless @ 181

Mrs. K8 @ 97

Mickey @ 79

I’m recommending that tomorrow the guys wear fishnets. That’ll ge the Jury working…

In the thread below, in response to a question about what would be appropriate “Let’s Celebrate!” attire, I signaled my intent to dance around the house in my birthday suit (and to salute the oncoming lunar eclipse at the same time).

No one said anything in response.

So maybe fishnet stockings would be ho-hum, too?

[Of course, my fear is that everyone just let it slip by silently because the image is too horrible to imagine…]

;-)

:-)

Birthday suit party at Mrs. K8’s house!

I’ll be putting on Jose Cuervo

Isn’t it a requirement to get naked on lunar eclipses here at the ‘lake?

Stephen Parrish, CPA @ 163

Mrs. K8 @ 1:59 pm -

(…and to salute the oncoming lunar eclipse at the same time).

Although it may not be visible in Arizona, go ahead and celebrate it anyway; the most recent total lunar eclipse occurred in late October 2004.

Stephen –

We remember that well! Mr. K8 and I stood on the back patio watching — and sang lines from every song we could think of with the word “moon” in it.

That’s a really fun game, BTW.

Toss out a word common to many song lyrics, like “RIVER!” — then the players have to sing the lyrics of songs with “RIVER” in them, taking turns. The loser is the person who can’t come up with yet another song.

Monsieur Le Prof @
98

Something to ponder while we wait:

The BBC has apparently lost all of its archived footage from Sept 11, 2001.

Two days ago, 9-11 researchers uncovered archive footage that showed the BBC had announced the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 at 5:00 PM EST. The reporter and graphics claimed the building had collapsed.

Only problem, it was still on the Manhattan skyline. The building didn’t actually fall until 5:20 PM EST.

The government claimed it fell due to fires (it was not hit by an airplane). It fell at virtually free-fall speed, about 7 seconds.

How did the BBC know the building would accidentally collapse 20 minutes before it did, unless there was some sort of source that knew it would fall around that time?

This is a smoking gun that 9-11 needs to be reinvestigated and that the conspiracy is much wider than the mainstream media indicated, namely the 19 hijackers.

Video can be viewed here

The BBC has tried to have this pulled from Google and YouTube during the last two days. Why? Why have they claimed to no longer have their original archives?

This is a very big story.

Pretty scary if true.

Pretty scary if true.

All due respect, but what do you mean “if true?”

You can see the archived footage for yourself. It’s all over YouTube and Google thanks to dedicated 9-11 researchers who have been fighting the censors.

Watch it. Decide for yourself. Either you’re with us, or you’re with the terrorists, right?

Michael Jones @
76

I don’t want to be pessimistic, but are the people on this jury awake and breathing? How long does it take to find an elephant in a 10′x10′ room?

Well, it’s not finding the elephant that’s the problem, but knowing that it’s there beyond a reasonable doubt. For instance, you walk into a 10′ x 10′ room. An elephant is in the middle of the room. Do you:

a) Wonder who slipped LSD in your coffee?

b) Ask yourself, how did I get here?

c) Contact the ASPCA about the elephant’s way too small accomodations? or

d) Ask the 10 blind men touching different parts if they’ve figured out what it is yet?

Thus the length of the jury deliberations.

randiego @ 172

Shopgirlove @ 130

randiego @ 86

I’m bouncing buckets of karma your way! Your next, I promise.

I think I start on Moday…I won’t know until tomorrow. Please, kind, wonderful jury people, please.

Thank you everyone, I have to go a rehearsal so until tomorrow!

Shopgirl -see how that works?? My most recent interview just called… second interview tomorrow at 1pm! Yes!

Yay!!!!

Good luck, randiego! And report back here, please! We all are interested in how it goes. The LakerPups have good karma! Yay!

Given that no steel-reinforced building had EVER collapsed due to fire

Well, when the curtain walls go, and the steel deforms from the heat, it doesn’t matter if ‘it’s never happened before’. Gravity doesn’t care. It just says ‘down is this way’. (The buildings weren’t designed for that scenario.)

d) Ask the 10 blind men touching different parts if they’ve figured out what it is yet?

My luck, I’d be on the South end and it was pointing North.

Hiya pups -

I’ve grown very fond of the Lake over the last year. What Jane and Christy and TRex and Peterr and all the posters and mods (and commenters) have created here is an amazing and powerful community.

With power comes attention – and critical scrutiny.

Without disrespect to any commenter, I share the UK Guardian’s George Monbiot’s recent wrtings on 9-11 conspiracy theories.

The Lake has acquired very real credibility because of the excellent careful work of our main posters.

My personal belief is that this credibility is worth preserving, and further that uncritical reception of 9-11 conspiracy theories corrodes the credibility of FDL.

[Those who have hung out with Bay Area activists have some idea of how much personal vitriol this belief generates.]

9/11 fantasists pose a mortal danger to popular oppositional campaigns

These conspiracy idiots are a boon for Bush and Blair as they destroy the movements some of us have spent years building

George Monbiot
Tuesday February 20, 2007

A 9/11 conspiracy virus is sweeping the world, but it has no basis in fact

Loose Change is a sharp, slick film with an authoritative voiceover, but it drowns the truth in an ocean of nonsense

George Monbiot
Tuesday February 6, 2007
The Guardian

There is a virus sweeping the world. It infects opponents of the Bush government, sucks their brains out through their eyes and turns them into gibbering idiots. First cultivated in a laboratory in the US, the strain reached these shores a few months ago. In the past fortnight, it has become an epidemic. Scarcely a day now passes without someone possessed by this sickness, eyes rolling, lips flecked with foam, trying to infect me.

Article continues
The disease is called Loose Change. It is a film made by three young men that airs most of the standard conspiracy theories about the attacks of September 11 2001. Unlike the other 9/11 conspiracy films, Loose Change is sharp and swift, with a thumping soundtrack, slick graphics and a calm and authoritative voiceover. Its makers claim that it has now been watched by 100 million people.

The Pentagon, the film maintains, was not hit by a commercial airliner. There was “no discernible trace” of a plane found in the wreckage, and the entrance and exit holes in the building were far too small. It was hit by a cruise missile. The twin towers were brought down by means of “a carefully planned controlled demolition”. You can see the small puffs of smoke caused by explosives just below the cascading sections. All other hypotheses are implausible: the fire was not hot enough to melt steel and the towers fell too quickly. Building 7 was destroyed by the same means a few hours later.

[snip]

The failure of the twin towers has been exhaustively documented by the National Institute of Standards and Technology. Far from being impossible, the collapse turns out to have been inevitable. The planes cut some of the support columns and ignited fires sufficient to weaken (but not melt) the remaining steel structures. As the perimeter columns buckled, the weight of the collapsing top stories generated a momentum the rest of the building could not arrest. Puffs of smoke were blown out of the structure by compression as the building fell.

Counterpunch, the radical leftwing magazine, commissioned its own expert – an aerospace and mechanical engineer – to test the official findings. He shows that the institute must have been right. He also demonstrates how Building 7 collapsed. Burning debris falling from the twin towers ruptured the oil pipes feeding its emergency generators. The reduction in pressure triggered the automatic pumping system, which poured thousands of gallons of diesel on to the fire. The support trusses weakened and buckled, and the building imploded. Popular Mechanics magazine polled 300 experts and came to the same conclusions.

and now for the vitriol :)

Water off a duck.

clueless @ 182

Mrs. K8 @ 97

Mickey @ 79

I’m recommending that tomorrow the guys wear fishnets. That’ll ge the Jury working…

In the thread below, in response to a question about what would be appropriate “Let’s Celebrate!” attire, I signaled my intent to dance around the house in my birthday suit (and to salute the oncoming lunar eclipse at the same time).

No one said anything in response.

So maybe fishnet stockings would be ho-hum, too?

[Of course, my fear is that everyone just let it slip by silently because the image is too horrible to imagine…]

;-)

:-)

Birthday suit party at Mrs. K8’s house!

Fine with me!

There’s only one requirement — nobody says anything about all my surgical scars, unless it’s to say they look absolutely lovely, an intriguing pattern…

;-)

Hey, mods! Kindly unleash my last (witty!) comment from purgatory?

Thanks in advance!

[Wonder what the prob was THIS time…]

karelroc @
181

I don’t think it would be vanity so much as a show of respect. Just as they didn’t wear their flip-flops when they showed up for voir dire, they don’t want to wear their “comfy clothes” for the conclusion of the case. When it’s just them deliberating and they’re not actually appearing in court, that’s somewhat different.

I read that Judge Walton met with the jury and then sent them home.

Any soothsayers out there? A conviction in the morning?

Oh, how sweet that would be!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

kirk murphy@2:38 – Thanks. I for one don’t need top look beyond the fact Bush was warned in advance of 9-11 and did less than nothing (ok mr cia briefer, you covered your a**). If we can’t get congress to impeach for that *cough* neglect. well…

Mrs. K8 @ 194

Hey, mods! Kindly unleash my last (witty!) comment from purgatory?

Thanks in advance!

[Wonder what the prob was THIS time…]

FDL knows when you’re typing in the altogether. Put some skivvies on. It’s not time for the party yet!

I take personal offense to the above comment. I also enjoy this blog, as I do many others. I am a researcher, historian, speak 3 languages, have a Masters degree in international relations. But enough about me.

I think anyone who has researched 9-11 realizes that the official story cannot be true. Addressing this issue is of the utmost importance. Accusing reseachers of being “a boon” to the powers that be is ridiculous. These are credible and dedicated people.

Any of the following sites will show you the information:

http://st911.org

Also check out the Journal of 9-11 studies.

I’m not going to spend all day debating whether or not steel buildings can fall due to fire. There are countless scientists who have studied the question, including NIST, which has not released its report on WTC 7.

These are legimate questions. This does not at all detract from the fine work done here at FDL on the Libby trial.

Monsieur Le Prof @
98

Something to ponder while we wait:

The BBC has apparently lost all of its archived footage from Sept 11, 2001.

Two days ago, 9-11 researchers uncovered archive footage that showed the BBC had announced the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 at 5:00 PM EST. The reporter and graphics claimed the building had collapsed.

Only problem, it was still on the Manhattan skyline. The building didn’t actually fall until 5:20 PM EST.

The government claimed it fell due to fires (it was not hit by an airplane). It fell at virtually free-fall speed, about 7 seconds.

How did the BBC know the building would accidentally collapse 20 minutes before it did, unless there was some sort of source that knew it would fall around that time?

This is a smoking gun that 9-11 needs to be reinvestigated and that the conspiracy is much wider than the mainstream media indicated, namely the 19 hijackers.

Video can be viewed here

The BBC has tried to have this pulled from Google and YouTube during the last two days. Why? Why have they claimed to no longer have their original archives?

This is a very big story.

I don’t get this at all! The BBC annonced abuilding collapsed 20 minutes before it collapsed and no one noticed it at the time?
CALL ME SKEPTICAL.

Monsieur Le Prof @ 188

Pretty scary if true.

All due respect, but what do you mean “if true?”

You can see the archived footage for yourself. It’s all over YouTube and Google thanks to dedicated 9-11 researchers who have been fighting the censors.

Watch it. Decide for yourself. Either you’re with us, or you’re with the terrorists, right?

Just watched it. Truly scary.

All due respect, but what do you mean “if true?”

You can see the archived footage for yourself. It’s all over YouTube and Google thanks to dedicated 9-11 researchers who have been fighting the censors.

Watch it. Decide for yourself. Either you’re with us, or you’re with the terrorists, right?

Mantra: Sit on your hands…sit on your hands…sit on your hands…

Aaah, I never was any good at that. And we’ve got nuttin bettah to doo until tomorrow, anyway.

I’m not saying it definitely isn’t true. I’ve followed the conspiracy stuff since day one, not too closely, not too distantly. This particular entry has some merit but also some problems which I won’t go into here.

The thing is, and this is why I generally don’t buy conspiracy theories, how could the incredibly incompetent, slip-shod, rag-tag bunch of bozos that is this administration possibly pull it off with not one slip, not one leak, not one screw-up? I just don’t think they could have managed to keep it secret. It would have taken so many people, over such a long time, involving so many different organizations – the probability of success in maintaining is vanishingly small.

YM will likely V.

Tomorrow, you should all walk around whispering to the Fox News people that Jeff Gannon is in the building, and watch them go screaming down the halls looking for an interview…. :)

Mrs K8 at 189… many thanks!!

yes, I’ll keep you posted, if you promise to share pictures from your naked/full moon/eclipse thing…

*g*

montag @ 203

Tomorrow, you should all walk around whispering to the Fox News people that Jeff Gannon is in the building, and watch them go screaming down the halls looking for an interview…. :)

or an assignation…

TeddySanFran @ 185

Isn’t it a requirement to get naked on lunar eclipses here at the ‘lake?

And I’m just saying this a full moon eclipse.

Responses to Monbiot’s hit piece are here:

http://www.prisonplanet.com/ar…..idiots.htm

http://crimesofthestate.blogsp…..ts-of.html

http://laukev7.blogspot.com/20…..thers.html

This issue is much bigger than Monbiot. Calling people who question the government “psychologially unstable” is an argument that does not refute any of the facts.

Millineryman @ 205

TeddySanFran @ 185

Isn’t it a requirement to get naked on lunar eclipses here at the ‘lake?

And I’m just saying this a full moon eclipse.

isn’t it always a full moon eclipse?

Any particular reason why 911 theories are cropping up today? Or did we just need an extra-shiny object to counteract Mrs. K8’s eclipse?

Notta Flatlander @ 203

All due respect, but what do you mean “if true?”

You can see the archived footage for yourself. It’s all over YouTube and Google thanks to dedicated 9-11 researchers who have been fighting the censors.

Watch it. Decide for yourself. Either you’re with us, or you’re with the terrorists, right?

Mantra: Sit on your hands…sit on your hands…sit on your hands…

Aaah, I never was any good at that. And we’ve got nuttin bettah to doo until tomorrow, anyway.

I’m not saying it definitely isn’t true. I’ve followed the conspiracy stuff since day one, not too closely, not too distantly. This particular entry has some merit but also some problems which I won’t go into here.

The thing is, and this is why I generally don’t buy conspiracy theories, how could the incredibly incompetent, slip-shod, rag-tag bunch of bozos that is this administration possibly pull it off with not one slip, not one leak, not one screw-up? I just don’t think they could have managed to keep it secret. It would have taken so many people, over such a long time, involving so many different organizations – the probability of success in maintaining is vanishingly small.

YM will likely V.

I agree but the mere fact that we are discussing it shows that they could keep it secret. Also remember the Manhattan project, which involved tens of thousands (including building an entire secret town in New Mexico) and no one found out.

Problem is, now the Internet exitsts, and information can spread faster without filters.

This is changing everything.

I agree this is scary stuff, but this is the unadulterated truth.

ISN’T THAT WHAT WE ARE ALL ASKING FOR!

And I’m just saying this a full moon eclipse.

Isn’t that oxymoronic?

LBrowne @ 210

Any particular reason why 911 theories are cropping up today? Or did we just need an extra-shiny object to counteract Mrs. K8’s eclipse?

I brought it up on this thread to “pass the time.” I’m waiting on a verdict too, and hoping for many, many more public trials. Aren’t you?

LBrowne @ 199

Mrs. K8 @ 194

Hey, mods! Kindly unleash my last (witty!) comment from purgatory?

Thanks in advance!

[Wonder what the prob was THIS time…]

FDL knows when you’re typing in the altogether. Put some skivvies on. It’s not time for the party yet!

Jeez. Can’t a girl PRACTICE? You know, pick out the appropriate jewelry and seven diaphanous veils?

Grumble, grumble…

;-)

So many people are speaking out about Bush. If Building 7 was an inside job, I can’t believe someone wouldn’t be talking by now unless they killed them all.

I was in lower Manhattan in 9/11 when the towers were hit. And while the day was a morass of confusion and chaos, one thing I do remember very clearly is that EVERYONE expected WT7 to collapse. So it would be no surprise to me if the anchor screwed up a report of an imminent collapse and a collapse which had already occured.

I don’t think anyone here was surprised; in fact I remember asking people if WT7 had collapsed “yet” throughout the afternoon.

randiego @ 205

Mrs K8 at 189… many thanks!!

yes, I’ll keep you posted, if you promise to share pictures from your naked/full moon/eclipse thing…

*g*

Why, I’m happy to share the (mental) pictures with the whole world!

How’s that?

:-)

I don’t get this at all! The BBC annonced abuilding collapsed 20 minutes before it collapsed and no one noticed it at the time?
CALL ME SKEPTICAL.

Did you watch the footage? I’m simply calling it like it is.

On 9-11 there was so much confusion, most people watching the BBC probably weren’t watching other networks too. And CNN also had a mess-up, reporting the building was “going to collapse or is collapsing,” about the same time.

Obviously something came over the wires before it happened. We need to know the sources of this information.

More can be read at http://911blogger.com

Again, this is not to distract from the fine work done here at FDL, just to share important information.

Woodhall Hollow- That’s interesting, I wonder why NIST can’t figure out what happened to building 7 over 5 years later.

Woodhall Hollow @ 216

I was in lower Manhattan in 9/11 when the towers were hit. And while the day was a morass of confusion and chaos, one thing I do remember very clearly is that EVERYONE expected WT7 to collapse. So it would be no surprise to me if the anchor screwed up a report of an imminent collapse and a collapse which had already occured.

I don’t think anyone here was surprised; in fact I remember asking people if WT7 had collapsed “yet” throughout the afternoon.

Uh, call me skeptical. Even the firefighters didn’t think it would collapse. They were told to evacuate and back away. Apparently there was a countdown to collapse over their radios. The owner said he made the decision to “pull it.” Networks had foreknowledge.

No building had ever collapsed due to fire (the NIST has not claimed it was due to damage, and the fires remained unexplained). The building was nearly a football field away from the other towers.

Even Dan Rather said live it looked like controlled demolition.

If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck ….

Favorite things to do while waiting for the verdict?

I’d recommend drinking Rumritas and munching on chips, salsa, and taquitos at Taqueria Poblano in the Del Ray neighborhood of Alexandria.

Woodhall Hollow @
216

I was in lower Manhattan in 9/11 when the towers were hit. And while the day was a morass of confusion and chaos, one thing I do remember very clearly is that EVERYONE expected WT7 to collapse. So it would be no surprise to me if the anchor screwed up a report of an imminent collapse and a collapse which had already occured.

I don’t think anyone here was surprised; in fact I remember asking people if WT7 had collapsed “yet” throughout the afternoon.

Yes. In fact, there were several buildings people were speculating would collapse. At least one of them, and I think it was more like two or three, did suffer partial collapses.

Kirk Murphy – Hear, Hear !!!!

Plus, since FDL is moderated, then the moderators should moderate.

M. Le Beouf is nothing but a thread hijacking troll, and he’s got many to play along, so he’s “winning.” Stop playing and he loses.

ohioblue @ 215

So many people are speaking out about Bush. If Building 7 was an inside job, I can’t believe someone wouldn’t be talking by now unless they killed them all.

People are speaking out. Firefighters and other city officials have come forward but have refused to give their names out of obvious fears for their safety. We need a new investigation.

Also, it was recently learned that one person was killed, a secret service agent, during the collapse. That makes this an active homicide investigation as well as insurance fraud, etc.

All of this can be googled or read over on 9-11 blogger which I’ve linked to here.

Stephen Parrish, CPA @ 163

Mrs. K8 @ 1:59 pm -

(…and to salute the oncoming lunar eclipse at the same time).

Although it may not be visible in Arizona, go ahead and celebrate it anyway; the most recent total lunar eclipse occurred in late October 2004.

As long as the moon is visible you can see a lunar eclipse from anywhere, unlike a solar eclipse. Solar eclipse is where moon moves in front of the sun and cast small, fast moving shadow on the earth; lunar eclipse is the earth blocking the sun so the shadow is on the moon, and thus can be seen from anyplace that is facing the moon at the time./Astronomy lesson

Yes. In fact, there were several buildings people were speculating would collapse. At least one of them, and I think it was more like two or three, did suffer partial collapses.

Uh, only in the WTC complex. The Deutsche Bank building was closer but suffered no structural damage. In fact, it’s being dismantled piece by piece right now, and is polluted with asbestos fibers (another possible motive for the WTC destruction).

The “collapse” stories were cover for demos.

Everythingseemssoneat @ 218

Woodhall Hollow- That’s interesting, I wonder why NIST can’t figure out what happened to building 7 over 5 years later.

Well, WT7 was an interesting stupid place. The home of Guiliani’s pride and joy, the ill fated 23rd floor NYC emergency command bunker installed after WTC ‘93 and over the strong objections of almost everyone…and then there were the highly inflamable FULL diesal tanks to run the emergency (on the 11th? I forget) on a high floor over the strong objections of the NYFD.

I’m sure there is a lot of stupidity which Guiliani (and his proxy Bloomberg) is hiding in that building. Starting with an emergency command center at the WTC on the 23rd freakin’ floor.

Monsieur Le Prof @ 220

[…]

Networks had foreknowledge.

[…]

Even Dan Rather said live it looked like controlled demolition.

If the “Networks had foreknowledge”, and they were trying to cover it up, then wouldn’t Rather have known better than to say it looked “controlled”?

Sorry, but you’re not making any sense.

Plus, since FDL is moderated, then the moderators should moderate.

M. Le Beouf is nothing but a thread hijacking troll, and he’s got many to play along, so he’s “winning.” Stop playing and he loses.

Look I’m as interested in the Libby case as the next guy. But this is also an important issue.

I’m sorry you feel you have to brand me as a troll because you are uncomfortable with the information I am presenting here.

Even Dan Rather said it looked like a controlled demolition.

Christ, everyone who saw those buildings collapse said that. Even I did. So what?

Le Prof—you’ve had your say on this thread. Time to leave well enough alone for the day.

Notta Flatlander @ 173

Hey, no plagiarizing from Dickens.

Yeah, who do you think you are? Joe Biden?

Is that supposed to be tongue in cheek? I hate Joe Biden. Also you’ve got the gender wrong.

Woodhall Hollow- Some people are saying Guiliani is considering Larry Silverstein as a running mate.

well, I missed most of this thread doing something that I suggest we all add to our list of Top Ten Things to do while Waiting for the Verdict:

Take a shower!

Hey fyi on Link television

Democracy Now is about to have an interview Sy Hersh

later this eveing

The film 9-11 Press For Truth

Truth Lies and the Press including
Bill Moyers 2007 speech in Memphis

petedownunder @
225

Stephen Parrish, CPA @ 163

Mrs. K8 @ 1:59 pm -

(…and to salute the oncoming lunar eclipse at the same time).

Although it may not be visible in Arizona, go ahead and celebrate it anyway; the most recent total lunar eclipse occurred in late October 2004.

As long as the moon is visible you can see a lunar eclipse from anywhere, unlike a solar eclipse. Solar eclipse is where moon moves in front of the sun and cast small, fast moving shadow on the earth; lunar eclipse is the earth blocking the sun so the shadow is on the moon, and thus can be seen from anyplace that is facing the moon at the time./Astronomy lesson

Here’s additional information about the eclipse:

http://www.space.com/spacewatc…..guide.html

re the WTC stuff: I posted links on the next thread (reverse EPU?) for those who really want to read expert opinions.

Stephen Parrish, CPA @ 236

petedownunder @
225

Stephen Parrish, CPA @ 163

Mrs. K8 @ 1:59 pm -

(…and to salute the oncoming lunar eclipse at the same time).

Although it may not be visible in Arizona, go ahead and celebrate it anyway; the most recent total lunar eclipse occurred in late October 2004.

As long as the moon is visible you can see a lunar eclipse from anywhere, unlike a solar eclipse. Solar eclipse is where moon moves in front of the sun and cast small, fast moving shadow on the earth; lunar eclipse is the earth blocking the sun so the shadow is on the moon, and thus can be seen from anyplace that is facing the moon at the time./Astronomy lesson

http://www.space.com/spacewatc…..guide.html

Looks like AZ and the west miss out, too bad. Thanks for the link.

mui @ 232

Notta Flatlander @ 173

Hey, no plagiarizing from Dickens.

Yeah, who do you think you are? Joe Biden?

Is that supposed to be tongue in cheek? I hate Joe Biden. Also you’ve got the gender wrong.

Hope it’s ok to jump in here — I’m certain it was good-natured snark, as Joe Biden is known in some circles as a plagiarizer.

The joke was sort of like hearing someone say “I decided XYZ” and the response being, “Hey, who do you think you are, George W. Bush, The Decider?”

Like that.

Western USA will get a lunar eclipse on August 27 of this year, hurray!

petedownunder @ 238

Stephen Parrish, CPA @ 236

petedownunder @
225

Stephen Parrish, CPA @ 163

Mrs. K8 @ 1:59 pm -

(…and to salute the oncoming lunar eclipse at the same time).

Although it may not be visible in Arizona, go ahead and celebrate it anyway; the most recent total lunar eclipse occurred in late October 2004.

As long as the moon is visible you can see a lunar eclipse from anywhere, unlike a solar eclipse. Solar eclipse is where moon moves in front of the sun and cast small, fast moving shadow on the earth; lunar eclipse is the earth blocking the sun so the shadow is on the moon, and thus can be seen from anyplace that is facing the moon at the time./Astronomy lesson

http://www.space.com/spacewatc…..guide.html

Looks like AZ and the west miss out, too bad. Thanks for the link.

But they don’t miss out completely, and for those of us on Eastern Standard Time, the eclipse will already be total at moonrise.

There are partial eclipses, where a sliver of the celestial body is not covered.

If memory serves me correctly, I think we have to burn money for good luck when we dance naked under the moon.

Do ya think $20 would guarantee a conviction?

TeddySanFran @ 240

Western USA will get a lunar eclipse on August 27 of this year, hurray!

Teddy – it will actually occur in the wee hours of the following morning. According to one of my astronomy books, the middle of this lunar eclipse’s total phase will occur at 3:36 AM PDT on August 28.

Organic George @ 242

There are partial eclipses, where a sliver of the celestial body is not covered.

If memory serves me correctly, I think we have to burn money for good luck when we dance naked under the moon.

Do ya think $20 would guarantee a conviction?

All we can afford is Monopoly money. But we’ll be happy to put in $1000 of that!

Mrs. K8

mui

Is that supposed to be tongue in cheek? I hate Joe Biden. […]

Hope it’s ok to jump in here — I’m certain it was good-natured snark, as Joe Biden is known in some circles as a plagiarizer.

Precisely. Now, you young’ns may not rememer it…. Joe Biden was caught redhanded (at law school, iirc) and received an F. As if that wasn’t enough, he later copied some British pol’s campaign speech pretty much verbatim.

Check the wiki. And also see here

Organic George @ 242

There are partial eclipses, where a sliver of the celestial body is not covered.

If memory serves me correctly, I think we have to burn money for good luck when we dance naked under the moon.

Do ya think $20 would guarantee a conviction?

I can’t answer your question, but think about how much was spent to defend him.

You’re right: partial lunar eclipses can be differentiated between partial penumbral eclipses, which are sometimes inconspicuous, and partial umbral eclipses, in which the umbra of Earth’s shadow covers a part of the lunar surface.

Shopgirlove @
54

I got a job!!!!! Finally, I can send my share to the kibble bowl!!!! First paycheck I’m hitting that button up there!
I heart FDL…

Congratulations!!!!

911 conspiracy pinheads were banned from dailykos months ago—can the mods do something about them here?

Monsieur Le Prof @ 168

Given that no steel-reinforced building had EVER collapsed due to fire (and it wasn’t hit by a plane) their foreknowledge is a damning piece of evidence that 9-11 may have been, along with shadowly terrorists, an inside “Executive Branch” job.

And if you watch the footage, it certainly looks like a professional demo job. The building collapses neatly, as though its underpinnings have been blown out from under it.

Monsieur Le Prof @ 199

I take personal offense to the above comment. I also enjoy this blog, as I do many others. I am a researcher, historian, speak 3 languages, have a Masters degree in international relations. But enough about me.

I think anyone who has researched 9-11 realizes that the official story cannot be true. Addressing this issue is of the utmost importance. Accusing reseachers of being “a boon” to the powers that be is ridiculous. These are credible and dedicated people.

Any of the following sites will show you the information:

http://st911.org

Also check out the Journal of 9-11 studies.

I’m not going to spend all day debating whether or not steel buildings can fall due to fire. There are countless scientists who have studied the question, including NIST, which has not released its report on WTC 7.

These are legimate questions. [snip]

Nice to meet you, Monseiur Le Prof.

I speak English, science, and medicine. (and bfd for me)

Myself, I’m from the hard sciences. The deep structure of science is that of verifiable hypotheses (assertions about the physical world regarding reproducible observations of repeated experiments.) The results of these observations are called data.

So I guess I’m a data guy.

Rhetoric is irrelevant to data.

The articles cited below are from Counterpunch – edited by Alexander Cockburn and Jefferey St. Clair. If they’re establishment apologists, they’ve been under veerrry deep cover for decades – so of course that means they have to be apologists, I suppose.

Monsieur La Prof, when challenged, you stated:

I’m not going to spend all day debating whether or not steel buildings can fall due to fire.

[italics mine]

Monsieur La Prof, it seems a Masters in International Relations doesn’t prepare one for the rough and tumble of hard science.

There is no Geneva Convention for academia.

Hard scientists spend careers debating specific hypotheses about the physical world (and occasionally trading personal insults outside of the journals’ solemn covers).

And your assertion contained allegations about the physical world.

And refutation of their hypotheses is what real scientists expect.

And real scientists don’t “take offense” when their credibilty is questioned or alternative hypotheses are presented – they offer the hard data that disproves the hypotheses.

Not the assertions – the hard data.

From what I can infer (from this n of 1) acquisition of these capacities for hypothesis testing appears not to be required for masters level degrees in international relations.

That’s OK – Condi has a Stanford doctorate in state propaganda international relations, and she can’t test hypotheses about the real world to save her closeted life and her pricy shoes.

No wonder our diplomatic efforts seem to fail so often.

Cockburn’s cover is particuarly deep, so this no doubt means he was infiltrator working for the Feds when he wrote:

November 28, 2006
The Age of Irrationality
The 9/11 Conspiracists and the Decline of the Anmerican Left

By ALEXANDER COCKBURN

Where was the American left in the campaign that ended in recapture of both houses of Congress by the Democrats on November 7, 2006? Was it in the streets, fomenting opposition to the war in Iraq? Not at all. The antiwar movement has been inert for months. When I was asked to give the keynote speech at a rare antiwar rally in my local town of Eureka, northern California, in early October, three of my five fellow orators didn’t deign to mention the war at all. Instead they numbed the audience and sharply diminished its size with interminable dissections of the 9/11/2001 attacks on the World Trade Center towers and the Pentagon. Their aim? To argue that the attacks were an “inside job”, organized by Bush and Cheney or (a frequent variation on the theme) darker powers, for whom Bush and Cheney are the mere errand boys.

What is the goal of the 9/11 conspiracists? They ask questions, yes, but they never answer them. They never put forward an overall scenario of the alleged conspiracy. They say that’s not up to them. So who is it up to? Who do they expect to answer their questions? When answers are put forward, they are dismissed as fabrications or they simply rebound with another question.

Of course the buildings didn’t suddenly fall at a speed inexplicable in terms of physics unless caused by carefully pre-placed explosives, detonated by the ruthless Bush-Cheney operatives. High grade steel can bend disastrously under extreme heat. As discussed in Wayne Barrett and Dan Collin’s excellent book Grand Illusion, about Rudy Giuliani and 9/11, helicopter pilots radioed warnings nine minutes before the final collapse that the South Tower might well go down and, repeatedly, as much as 25 minutes before the North Tower’s fall.

The next three articles are from Manuel Garcia, Ph.D.

a native New Yorker who works as a physicist at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California with a PhD Aerospace & Mechanical Engineering, from Princeton His technical interests are generally in fluid flow and energy, specifically in gas dynamics and plasma physics; and his working experience includes measurements on nuclear bomb tests, devising mathematical models of energetic physical effects, and trying to enlarge a union of weapons scientists. He can be reached at mango@idiom.com

Manuel Garcia Jr, physicist and engineer, presents his three separate reports, undertaken for CounterPunch.

Part One is his report on the Physics of 9/11.

Part Two (published here for the first time) is his report on the Thermodynamics of 9/11.

Part Three, “Dark Fire“, is his report on the collapse of the World Trade Center’s Building 7.

Lies! (the Bay Area Conspiracy theorists tell me)

Of course, he works for Livermore, so he must be part of the conspiracy.

As is everyone who disagrees.

Everyone who isn’t with the conspiracy theorists, admiring their reflections from within curved walls of the rhetorical vacuum flask they have created about their hypotheses assertions…

Everyone who disagrees – we’re all part of the conspiracy.

That’s how our local 9-11 conspiracy theorists reply to my hard science questions.

When I hear or read this, why am I thinking about the diagnostic criteria for delusional disorders?

Why do I feel like I’m sitting in mental health clinic, reassuring the patient who “knows” that if I don’t beleive the FBI is following him, I’m part of the conspiracy?

Because the content of the 9-11 conspiracy theories are indistinguishable from the content of paranoid delusions.

Here on the left coast, the same “activists” who squandered years of their lives and caused uncounted deaths with their delusions about AIDS

– (not caused by a virus, don’t you know? caused by the AIDS drugs – or vaccines. so don’t get tested/use condoms/get treated.)

– the same “activists” who used to pester me about their AIDS conspiracy delusions now pester me with their 9-11 conspiracy theories.

So Monsieur La Prof, I am not seeking to assert that you personally are delusional – I obviously do not know you.

I am asserting – and I do believe – that the 9-11 conspiracy theorists and theories I am in direct contact with display content identical to the content of paranoid delusions.

And I am also asserting – and do believe – that a whole lot of progressive social networks and organizations become paralyzed and ineffective as soon as the group focuses on the conspiracy theories.

And when I read them here, I’ll point that out.

If that’s too rough for those trained to grapple with nations….

words fail me.

mui @ 231

Notta Flatlander @ 173

Hey, no plagiarizing from Dickens.

Yeah, who do you think you are? Joe Biden?

Is that supposed to be tongue in cheek? I hate Joe Biden. Also you’ve got the gender wrong.

Err – uh – I think I was the target on that one …

I was kinda flattered – here I’ve been wondering what cosmetic dentistry could do and *poof* – i’m right up there with the blinding teeth crowd.

I think I’ll skip the hair implants.

Middle age white guys look silly with corn rows.

fatbob @ 122

portia.vz @ 28

mayan @ 22

List or listen to every recorded piece of American music pertaining to breaking the law:
1. I fought the law and the law won;
2. That’s the sound of the men working on the chain-gang;
3. Lawyer Clark (Sleepy John Estes)
4. Vioila Lee Blues (Cannon Jug Stompers)

etc. etc…Ya know, the power of positive thinking

Add The Authority Song by John Mellencamp

Don’t forget:
“Mama Tried” Merle Haggard and
“Folsom Prison” Johnny Cash

Or “Jail House Rock” by Elvis

Anybody remember the lyrics to that old standard, “Let Me Go, Lover”? (”let me be, set me free from your spell”)

Everytime I hear it these days when listening to my favorite internet radio station, The 1920s Radio Network (they also play 30s and 40s tunes), it makes me think of Judy Judy Judy sitting pensively for 85 days in her jail cell.

Hee hee.

kirk murphy @ 251

Err – uh – I think I was the target on that one …

Have to climb up to the top to check… yes, mui called you on plagiarizing so my shot would have been (nominally) at you. Of course, the target was in fact Plagiarisen Biden, not you at all.

Middle age white guys look silly with corn rows.

And so, mr. scienterriffic conspiracy theory denier (sorry, couldn’t resist), you have empirical data to support that claim? More to the point, are you claiming that applies to all MAWGs? If not, then we have to assume your data is as much anecdotal as empirical. As in….you didn’t, did you?

Notta Flatlander @ 253

kirk murphy @ 251

Err – uh – I think I was the target on that one …

Had to climb up to the top nut yes, mui called you on plagiarizing so my shot would have been (nominally) at you. Of course, the target was in fact Plagiarisen Biden, not you at all.

Middle age white guys look silly with corn rows.

And so, mr. scienterrifficist (sorry, couldn’t resist), you have empirical data to support that claim? More to the point, are you claiming that applies to all MAWGs? If not, then we have to assume your data is as much anecdotal as empirical. As in….you didn’t, did you?

Now you know why I didn’t go to YKos…

karelroc @ 187

Monsieur Le Prof @
98

Something to ponder while we wait:

The BBC has apparently lost all of its archived footage from Sept 11, 2001.

Two days ago, 9-11 researchers uncovered archive footage that showed the BBC had announced the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 at 5:00 PM EST. The reporter and graphics claimed the building had collapsed.

Only problem, it was still on the Manhattan skyline. The building didn’t actually fall until 5:20 PM EST.

The government claimed it fell due to fires (it was not hit by an airplane). It fell at virtually free-fall speed, about 7 seconds.

How did the BBC know the building would accidentally collapse 20 minutes before it did, unless there was some sort of source that knew it would fall around that time?

This is a smoking gun that 9-11 needs to be reinvestigated and that the conspiracy is much wider than the mainstream media indicated, namely the 19 hijackers.

Video can be viewed here

The BBC has tried to have this pulled from Google and YouTube during the last two days. Why? Why have they claimed to no longer have their original archives?

This is a very big story.

Pretty scary if true.

My son in law’s brother died at the WTC
He worked for Cantor Fitzgerald
He was only 23
There Definitely is a cover-up
My coonhound could show you where this trail
is pointing

I’d like to recommend a lesser known book on 9/11 that I found interesting — it is not intended to support any particular argument.

David Friend is an Editor at Vanity Fair — formerly Photo Editor at Life — and last year he published “Watching the World Change: The Stories behind the Images of 9/11″ — published by Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 2006. What Friend did was collect images mostly from professional photographers, organize the stories behind the taking of the pictures, and then write the book. Book is keyed to the net as many of the interesting photos are not printed in the book — better viewed on a monitor.

Friend estimates at least two million pictures were taken on 9/11 — as were thousands of hours of video. Friend had a hand in archiving a large chunk of this, collecting the details behind the taking of particular pictures, the angle, the point of view. Remember none of the photographers in the first hours knew what they were photographing, and many photographers had never done “War Front” photography. Among the photographers would be the 500 accredited Fashion Week Professionals — it was Fashion Week in NYC — and a large number of international videographers in town for MTV’s awards the night before. Apparently all grabbed camera and went off to shoot —

The book won’t solve anyone’s argument, but it does address the really more profound question of how we see, organize what we see, interpret the image, and relate it to other images.

I suspect one reason Friend’s book did not get lots of play is that he deals with the jumpers, as several photographers apparently were positioned to see them, and exclusively photographed them. He tells a fascinating story about this and the efforts after the fact to erase so much about that from archive film and video.

9/11 truth goes supernova.

Wow, a Libby conviction must be in the cards, if 9/11 spamming is the best the opposition can come up with.

portia.vz @ 28

mayan @ 22

List or listen to every recorded piece of American music pertaining to breaking the law:
1. I fought the law and the law won;
2. That’s the sound of the men working on the chain-gang;
3. Lawyer Clark (Sleepy John Estes)
4. Vioila Lee Blues (Cannon Jug Stompers)

etc. etc…Ya know, the power of positive thinking

Add The Authority Song by John Mellencamp

Pretty Boy Floyd, Frankie and Johnny and
Pretty Polly – all traditional

and, for pure menace:
Powderfinger – Neil Young
Time to Get a Gun – Fred Eaglesmith

I enjoy the musical breaks around the doglake campfire. Thanks again for the link to K.D. Lang’s cover of The Valley. It’s still perched atop my recent youtube playlist. Here’s a link to a cover of Leonard Cohen’s Anthem that I submit as a tribute to Betty Trophey who has vigiled against this war for 212 consecutive Sundays in Little Compton, Rhode Island; and to Joyce Katzberg who has witnessed on Saturdays in Providence, RI for some suchlike number of Saturdays. Anthem is a favorite of Betty’s.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=BffduenkO4E

“I can run no more
with that lawless crowd
while the killers in high places
say their prayers out loud . . .”

l.c.

Ask David Schuster how the wolverines did against the Buckeyes last November.

erMonsieur Le Prof @ 229

Plus, since FDL is moderated, then the moderators should moderate.

M. Le Beouf is nothing but a thread hijacking troll, and he’s got many to play along, so he’s “winning.” Stop playing and he loses.

Look I’m as interested in the Libby case as the next guy. But this is also an important issue.

I’m sorry you feel you have to brand me as a troll because you are uncomfortable with the information I am presenting here.

erm why are you presenting it here?

Sawasdee Krup from Bangkok, y’all.

Ok, yuck it up you furballs, but us “tin foil hatter,s” sites are reporting Libby has been found guilty of 3 counts of Perjury. The judge knows this, yet sent them home before the verdict was announced. That it is leading to a reopening of the Marc Rich case, the one you all know Libby was an attorney for, that he successfully lobbied “Big Dog” for a presidential pardon?

That a Newsweek Reporter (and I use that term loosely) has perhaps spoken with one of the unsequestered Jurors. Jury Tampering allegations next up?

That Hillary Clinton funded the “report” of Gore’s electric bill, through one of Limbaugh’s scumbag associates. Paid him $35,000 to propagandize this non-issue. Scared her msm driven and financed campaign is foundering? She IS one of the “allowable” choices for us peasants, no?

Prove me wrong.

Oh, and go get’em, Jane.

kirk murphy @ 255

Notta Flatlander @ 253

kirk murphy @ 251

Err – uh – I think I was the target on that one …

Had to climb up to the top nut yes, mui called you on plagiarizing so my shot would have been (nominally) at you. Of course, the target was in fact Plagiarisen Biden, not you at all.

Middle age white guys look silly with corn rows.

And so, mr. scienterrifficist (sorry, couldn’t resist), you have empirical data to support that claim? More to the point, are you claiming that applies to all MAWGs? If not, then we have to assume your data is as much anecdotal as empirical. As in….you didn’t, did you?

Now you know why I didn’t go to YKos…

Oh geez, sorry you two. Frayed nerves or something.

Regarding 9/11:

“At first they ignore you. Next they ridicule you. Next they fight you. Next they accept you.”

There is just too many unanswered questions. I’m not totally convinced by some of the weirder theories, but I am convinced of this – the so-called “official version” of 9/11 is bull. The most compelling DVD is indeed “9/11 Press For Truth”. It’s hard to argue against those that actually had loved ones die in the attacks, that if it wasn’t for them there would have been any investigation at all (as phony as it was – the Kean Report is to the Warren Commission, half truths and ignored evidence) If you are a doubter I urge you to watch “Press For Truth”

There needs to be an independent criminal investigation.

To those that say 9/11 conversation should be banded, I have to ask, how does the denouncement of the free expression of thoughts fit into the First Amendment? Anyone should be free to express anything they wish and it’s up to each person to decide the merits. But to just ban a subject? I find that to be totally against the principles of progressive thought.