Whoa, Building 7 just dropped and Tucker refused to even acknowledge it. Why are people like Tucker even afraid to question the events and evidence of 9/11.
@001mbuelow They have enough prove see the videos, or the interviews that clearly state that there where bombs planted in the buildings. Do you actually believe that some fools with knifes could violate the National Air Deffense System (NORAD)?? Do you believe that 19 individuals could make the most powerfull Nation in the world look like idiots?
@argusmaiden no one infiltrated NORAD, terrorists hyjacked planes and flew them into buildings, thats all there is too it. There is no other evidence to say otherwise, which is why the entire world agrees with the official report. Excpt for a few bored losers with nothing better to do, such as yourself and the rest of the "Truthers" out there.
@001mbuelow Not the rest of the world believes that I'm not even from USA, I just find very difficult to say that some people from a cave could make the most powerfull country in the world look like idiots just with knifes. According to the report the twin towers came down,(at nearly free fall speed, in the exact same way that a controled demolition does, they both fall EXACTLY the same way coincidently)who where hit by a plane but builiding 7 still falled down, but it wasn't even hit by a plane
@argusmaiden no controlled demolition,no inside job, no free fall speed, just hyjacked planes flown into buildings. You do believe in previously hyjacked planes right? Its not impossible, its been done for centeries.And when one gigantic skyscaper falls on a smaller skyscraper, then the smaller skyscaper will probably fall too. What do you think, there was a third plane for NYC that just didnt make it and theUS gov said, "oh well, blow building 7 anyway, no one will notice?" Seriously, dumb!!!!
@001mbuelow It's just a matter of opinion, if you want to believe in the official theory you can, I on the other side still believe that it was an inside job just for having an excuse for going for Iraq and Afganistan Oil.
Tucker is sad! At least he took Jon Stewarts advice and lost the bow tie, but stewart was right it is all theater with Carlson. At least only retarded people take him or his "news org" seriously. And actually, the BBC is 100% better than fox. They even reported building 7 fell before it happened !( must have got the script early) Check out Jane Stanley BBC reports Salomom bros building ( WTC 7) falls before it actually does, amazing so many sheep still by the govt. lies
@fastfox9 This is a classic misconception. The 9/11 Commission was a commission not an investigation. The investigation was done and carried out by NIST, FEMA, the FAA, the FBI, the CIA, et al. NOT the 9/11 Commission. Stop spewing this nonsense. The combined cost of the above mentioned entities investigations was well over 100 million. It's an invalid comparison, stop using it.
@fastfox9 And? Danny Jowenko only thought WTC 7 was demolished, he did NOT think 1 or 2 were and said so often. He also only thought that about WTC 7 when shown the 7 second clip of the collapse portrayed on September Mysteries without audio. He was ambushed by the "journalist" and never saw the complete damage the building sustained. DRG is a theologian with ZERO scientific background. None, nada, zilch. He's written something like 12 books on 9/11 and you don't think it's about money? ROFL
@fastfox9 David Ray Griffin hasn't proven shit aside of the fact that he's a charlatan and you're a moron for buying into his bullshit, but that's exactly what he wants...YOU to BUY his BULLSHIT. "If you read this book, and you read my other two books". He's a profiteer and you're an idiot.
when i hear someone use the word "blasphemous" or "sinful" in reference to the questioning of institutions, companies, billionaires or politicians, i worry.
Tucker employing the Neural Linguistic Programming technique i see. Its amazing to see Tucker speak as if the media doesnt have its own agenda.....like because since he "worked" in journalism he knows all about how a story (lie) transitions into fact. Loved the fake laugh........still tryin to promote the official story i see. I dont even watch that BS because its too much WWE wrestling. News in America is a joke nowdays.
Griffin has no fact checking whatsoever. He is a liar and the theif selling his soul to sell a few books. Rarely does he say anything that is true. In the interview he says the 9/11 Commission omits building 7. GUESS WHAT GRIFFIN YOU MORON. 9/11 Commission wasn't tasked with studying or reporting on that area, nor the collapses of WTC 1/2. They were tasked with the events leading up to the attacks, where the govt failed to protect, ect. NIST was tasked with WTC and 7. DRG is an idiot.
@mikeyt34 Griffin is someone who should know better. As an academic, he should know the proper way to do research and accurately convey information. Yet he intentionally misinterprets and distorts the facts. He quotes firefighters talking about explosions as if explosions could only be caused by explosives. No wonder he was theology professor. 911 truth is a religion, not a serious effort to understand reality.
It's a good thing Tucker Carlson is a trust fund kid because he is one worthless, smug, arrogant piece of shit and if he didn't have a well connected family, what would this asshole do in life ?
LOL, Griffin owned this tool. Boy, isn't it funny how the anchors on FOX News, CNN and MSNBC all have exactly the same incredulous attitude towards people who don't believe the official 9/11 sham? It's almost as if the entire American mainstream media, left, right and center, have ALL been complicit in protecting the government's sorry asses. Hmmmm....
So Tucker is basically saying it's "Wrong, blasphemous and sinful," to question your government...? (I'm not even gonna explain what's wrong with that...just look at history) "(2:00)Why is the church spreading such a hateful message?"...Hateful message? WTF?
Check out "9/11 The Myth and The Reality" and DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH. Don't believe either of those theories...look at the facts, double check them and see what comes out...
Some of this stuff is really fucking suspicious(at the very least)
Griffin is definitely not an idiot. Also why would tucker say that the BBC is a low source of journalism? It's up there with the NY times and Washington Post.
I'd love to stomp at that tool bag mother fuckers head - tucker is the biggest tool of them all. that laugh when he mentioned the bbc - DAMN what an uneducated, complicit douche bag
@noozilander Yep, it was reported under WTC 6, which no one says was a controlled demolition. So much for "molten metal" being an indicator of controlled demolition, dunce. You lose.
@noozilander One thing we know for sure: Thermite can't keep anything molten after the reaction ends. Despite ludicrous claims that it was all insulated but people saw this metal flowing despite its being insulated (LOL!), there's nothing that could have kept metal in a molten form except for additional energy inputs. LMAO!
@noozilander I already told you, asshole. The only way to keep metal in a molten form is to add energy. The only source of energy was the debris-fueled fires. Thermite or thermate or whatever it is you're claiming today can't keep anything in a molten form after the reaction ends. So whatever conglomeration of metal people saw flowing, it wasn't caused by a thermite reaction. Too bad for you, clown.
@PoetryHound I have never claimed to know whether thermite, thermate or even nano-thermite was used. All I've said is that Steven Jones found the chemical signature of 'thermitic material' in the Ground Zero dust samples.
He also found some unreacted thermitic material chips and no-one (including you coward) has EVER been able to dispute that evidence. It has however been endorsed by several other scientists.
@noozilander Well, which "chemical signature" are you referring to? Are you jumping around the same way Steven Jones is? Whatever his flavor of the day is, you'll be sure to parrot it. LOL!
No one takes his dumb chip claim seriously, especially since the chips were anti-corrosive coating. He only talked about 1 side of the composite chips & ignored the other side. That's what you truthers do - ignore anything that's inconvenient. No one has ever corroborated what his group claimed.
@noozilander "Jews are renowned for foals flag attacks"
Those are your original words that you're running away from. LOL!
Yeah, you never said FL 77 flew over the Pentagon. You just referenced the FDR which you said showed it at a higher elevation than the Pentagon. I'm sure you had no point to make in making that claim.
I was wrong about North. If you look at a map, the angle is actually Northwest. Unlike you, I actually checked it out. You simply regurgitate crap from some twoofer site.
@noozilander Oh, I guess you have trouble reading so I have to repeat information for you. If you would bother to look at a map, you'd see the angle is actually NW. But you're too lazy, aren't you clown?
You're a dickhead, dead cunt, fellatio-boy, etc. etc. *yawn*
You started with North, then you changed to North-west, but in reality it was the WEST side of the Pentagon. What makes it especially funny is the fact you said anyone who doesn't relise it was hit on the North side is mentally retarded........and I guess you are for thinking it was the North side too, ya fuckin' dickhead!!
LMFAO!
You never seem to tire of making a cunt of yourself, fellatio-boy. LOL!
@noozilander Once again, you refuse to look at a map of the trajectory. It shows a NW angle, dumbo. I had North wrong, it was NW. At least I admit errors. You never do. That's what makes you a clown.
(You're also a dickhead, cunt, fellatio-boy, etc etc. blah blah)
@noozilander Why should I believe bullshit from you? You never back up a single assertion. And you can never admit when you're wrong, continuing to claim the BBC never retracted their hijackers-are-alive report when I showed you the retraction! You've got a truly enormous ego if you can't even admit you're wrong about the retraction. But that's okay. It's just more entertainment for me! I get to keep shoving it in your face! LOL!
Cocksucker dickhead fellatio-boy, etc. etc. blah blah
The BBC changed the wording in the article to say 'a man named Waleed Al shehri', instead of simply 'Waleed Al shehri', you deceitful lying cunt! LOL!
That might be a retraction in your tiny mind, fellatio-hound, but not to anyone else coward!
Can you be anymore pathetic with your lies, or are you maxed out akready?
@noozilander The BBC corrected their error, you moron. God, you're dumb. You claim it wasn't a retraction when that's precisely what it was. You're exposed for being a circus clown. LOL!
Oh yeah, you're also a cunt, fellatio-boy, dickhead, cocksucker, blah blah blah
@noozilander You're so afraid to admit that the BBC retracted their report. Sorry, it's staring you right in the face. They no longer claim any hijackers are alive. They stated it was a case of mistaken identity. You can no longer claim the BBC as a source for your wacky claim that one of the hijackers is still alive.
@PoetryHound -"In an effort to make this clearer, we have made one small change to the original story. Under the FBI picture of Waleed al Shehri we have added the words "A man called Waleed Al Shehri..."-
"...a small change..." LMFAO!
So much for your fantasy about a retraction, fellatio-hound!
@noozilander What you refuse to accept is that the BBC went back and made the change in order to retract their claim that the the hijacker and the living person are two different people. Why else go back and make the chance, nutjob? The photos don't match, their pre-911 movements don't match. It was mistaken identity, which you're the only one in the world that fails to comprehend. LOL!
@PoetryHound They made the small wording change under the photo, but they retained the fact that Waleed Al shehri was definitely the same one referred to by the FBI and when they asked the FBI for clarification, all the FBI could say was that they were confident they had the right suspects! LOL!
So there was NO retraction, the FBI couldn't explain why Waleed Al shehri was alive and they have NEVER revised their incorrect list of suspects!
@noozilander Hey clown, why did you stop chasing your tail? It's so much fun to watch you claim NIST investigators are all liars except when you say they aren't. Hahahaha. I love it. How about the media? You can do the same thing and claim they're all lying except when you say they're not! Hahahaha! Your confusion is my entertainment! Assclown. LOL!
@noozilander says"the terrorists stole the passports of the Saudi pilots with the same name"
No they didn't. Those are your words and your fanstasy, you silly little clown. Just shows how low you'll go by claiming I said that. Hey, why don't you blame da Joos for the mistaken identity, bigot? LOL!
More like church U.S. Government-sanctioned conspiracy church. You have to be a devout believer to think the Marx Brothers were running air defense on 9-11.
No demo experts IN THE WORLD say explosives brought down the twin towers, not even ones in countries that hate America. None.
If you think all US demo experts would remain silent, & all highrise structural engineers, forensic engineers, metallurgists, fire protection engineers, & physicists would remain silent, you're simply revealing what YOU would do if you were one of these experts. YOU'D remain silent. Wow, what great character you have. LOL!
@noozilander We're talking about the twin tower, not WTC 7, you ignorant piece of shit! But since you raised Jowenko, do you know what he said about the twin towers? That they were NOT demo jobs. Still think he's credible? Or was he suddenly paid off and started lying? Hahaha! What a confused jerk you are. You are crushed once again! LOL!
@PoetryHound Danny Jowenko agreed without any coaching that wtc 7 was controlled demolition. That means inside job, end of story!
No buildings the size of the towers have been demolished before so he would know the method they used obviously. Remember you cried about no demo workers saying there was controlled demolition and you have been proved wrong AGAIN coward! LOL!
@noozilander The interviewer didn't tell Jowenko that WTC 7 it had major fires raging in it (according to FDNY), or that in footage with sound there is no sign of detonation charges, or that the collapse was expected by FDNY & other experts on the scene, or that there were no traces of detonation charges in the seismic record. So he didn’t have all the info that would have been useful to make a judgment. And if you think Jowenko is credible, note that he says WTC 1 & 2 were NOT demolitions.
@noozilander The interviewer didn't tell Jowenko how much damage was caused by WTC1, that it had major fires raging in it (according to FDNY), that in footage with sound there is no sign of detonation charges, that there's no trace of detonation charges in the seismic record, and that the collapse was expected by FDNY & other experts on the scene. That information was withheld. So yes, he didn’t have all the info that would have been useful to make a judgment.
@PoetryHound Awwww poor liddle Pussy. LOL! Is it not fair that they didn't tell Danny that there were numerous explosions around ground zero that day, molten metal found under all three towers, the FDNY evacuated not long before the demolition, NIST said the towers did not significantly damage WTC 7 and it collapsed due to fire alone.........
Danny just knew it was controlled demolition anyway, without LIARS like you coaching him.
@noozilander Explosions are common in fires, you nutcase. Molten metal is not an indicator of demolition. Guess what? It was reported under WTC 6 where no one says there was a demolition. So much for the molten metal nonsense.
The FDNY moved everyone back from WTC 7 after they determined the building was unstable. Thanks for reminding me. The interviewer didn't tell Jowenko that either.
Once again, if you think Jowenko is credible, he said the twin towers were NOT CDs. LOL!
@noozilander "NIST said the towers did not significanly damage WTC 7"
Oh, so you think NIST is credible? Good. After all, the NIST investigators from the government, universities, and private firms have expertise and experience. Guess what they said caused the collapse of WTC 7? Still think they're credible? Or do you get to decide which things they said are true and which are false? LOL. what a funny clown you are!
@noozilander You cited NIST to support a point you wanted to make. Thus, you find them credible on that point. LOL!!!! So you pick and choose which things they said that you think are correct and which are incorrect. That's funny! It's another example of your dishonesty. I love watching you shoot yourself in the foot. LOL!
@noozilander You cited NIST because you thought what they said was correct. So you get to decide for yourself which things they say are correct and which are incorrect, right? One minute you're condemning NIST and the next minute you're referencing them as a credible source. Hahahaha. That's funny! That's what makes you a clown.
@PoetryHound My citing of NIST information is simply to show you how you are contradicting the same authors of the fairy tale that you give your undying support to fellatio-boy!
They said the towers collapse did not cause significant structural damage to WTC 7 (which is true) and you claimed the exact opposite! LOL!
You are a simply a stupid contradiction yourself, swallower! LMAO!
@noozilander Liar. You cite NIST to back up your own points when it's convenient to do so - like that the debris damage from WTC 1 didn't cause WTC 7 to collapse (I never claimed the opposite btw). THAT'S why you cite them. But then you're quick to turn around and dismiss them when it suits you. I actually don't mind you being so two-faced because it's good for laughs and proves you're a circus clown. LMAO!
@PoetryHound NIST are in the main not credible, but the fact that you keep contradicting your own favourite fairy tale, authored by NIST, just means that you are too childlike to comprehend how this discredits you totally.
LOLOLOL! You're still doing it! You agree with what they say when you think it helps you conspiracy fairytale and say they're wrong when they say something you don't want to believe. That's funny! It's one of the things that makes you a kook. That's what kooks do!
@PoetryHound I don't agree with NIST overall because they conclude with lies, but I do enjoy pointing out when you contradict their story with your own bullshit and you are supposed to be in full agreement with them!
You are just too dumb to be quiet when you make a load of yourself, liddle fella! LOL!
@noozilander I've never contradicted NIST, but it sure is funny how you can't decide whether they're credible or not. What's hilarious is when you cite something they say as being credible and then turn around and claim they're not credible. Except when you say so. That's what makes you a funny circus clown. LOL
@PoetryHound You claimed the towers caused damage to WTC 7 and that damage added to the collapse of WTC 7. Turns out NIST don't agree with you, LOSER!
@noozilander Read more carefully, clown. I said the towers caused damage to WTC 7. However, I never said the damage added to the collapse. That's your misinterpretation. NIST said the damage didn't contribute to the collapse, although perhaps that's not true if you think NIST isn't credible. LOL! I love how you tie yourself in knots going back and forth about whether they told the truth. You're a true clown! Honk honk! You're exposed for being liar and a clown.
You said the towers falling caused structural damage to WTC 7 and now you're running away from your claim after being exposed as a fool and a coward once again.
@noozilander You need a remedial reading class, coward!
I never said the debris damage to the building contributed to the collapse. That's just your the deranged conspiracy voices in you head talking to you. It's your dementia, assclown.
How ironic that it turns out to be you that's the sniveling coward. LMFAO!
Of course it does. Not a single demo expert from any country says explosives brought down the towers. But of course, you think they're all stupid or scared and you claim it was a demo because you say so. With no corroboration or substantiation, as usual. Just the same old because-I-say-so craplola. LOL!
@noozilander Nope, you're wrong. Jowenko did not say WTC 1 & 2 were demo'd. You got that wrong. He said they were NOT demo'd, dumbshit. Whenever kooks are backed into a corner on the twin towers, they try to change the subject to WTC 7 and vice versa. LOL, what a pathetically transparent con they attempt. You're retarded.
@noozilander If you think Jowenko is credible, note that he said WTC 1 & 2 were NOT demos. Looks like you'll run away from that just like you run away from all the facts. Jowenko pretty much destroys your fairytale fantasy that the twin towers were demo'd. LOLOLOL!
@noozilander Because you can't answer facts about WT 1 & 2, you change the subject to WTC 7. LOLOL! Example: When told no demo expert says explosives brought down the twin towers, you respond with Jowenko who only talked about the demo of WTC 7. LOLOL! You are a pathetic and ignorant little child. LMAO!
It's funny Tucker refers to Griffin's thoughts on and inside job as "blasphemous." Does Tucker consider members of the Bush administation to be religious figures?
Keep in mind that the news networks are runed and controlled by the international bankers that are behind the government, of course that stupid guy is trying to deviate the actual message of Dr. Griffin and trying to make him look crazy. The evidence is clear and doesn't need to be supported, it supports itself......
Tucker is an arrogant horse's ass! What is HIS evidence that the government wasn't guilty?? He has none! He merely states the government is not responsible with no evidence to back that up! Unless it was burning jet fuel! LOL!!!
Tucker, you are a COMPLETE JOKE. You are a totally ignorant, sorry excuse for a journalist, and human being. I'll echo the comment below because it descibes you perfectly. You are definitely a FUCKTARD.
Tucker: "Hello Mr. Griffin, you haven no evidence that the government's behind 9/11, I frankly think it's an awful thing to allege, considering it's not true and you haven't proved that it is!"
Remember: all hes saying is that he used to agree with the offical report, then he looked into it personally, now because of the evidence we have today is not consistant with with offical report, alot of questions unanswered and the questions answered dont make sense and produce more questions lmao, more and more people are looking into it themselves and are finding out that exactly what this man here is saying is true, ask yourself this, if it wasnt true then why are more people believing it?
They never have enough time to let the guy finish, the come up with assumptions. But "I don't wanna cut you off, unfortunelly w'ere out of time" blah blah blah. They can't face any fact, and voer everything up with accustic jamming the interviewed person. The same thing happened to prof. Jones and others. They're trying to make a nutcase of everyone even trying to ask difficult questions. And these guy Tucker is one of the worst tv reporters I saw in my life.
damn that reporter is stupid, he has no evidence that is wasnt an inside and all he says is it isnt true.. we would report that if it was true..haha please,,,
lol one simple word for Talker instead of Tucker. "IDIOT" wow he just committed 10 different argument fallacy's in less than 6 minutes lol. And we allow Traitors like Tucker on our manipulated bought out media? lol no surprise there...
its funny how people who do not think it was an inside job use the lousy arguement " it just isnt true , it didnt happen" and the people who do believe it was an inside job provide nailing evidence after evidence.. it is so obvious that it was an inside job... tons of evidence
@heightboosting Of course 9/11 was done by the globalists. They have established their Central Banks in the States, have Americans enslaved with taxation now it is time to establish their banks around the world. It makes compete sense to create war to justify there outcome to establish global banking system. "Never question us, Obey the law we create for you, Destroy the Constitution". Our government has been high jacked since 1913, those who take office are central banking scums not Americans.
@Annuunnaki hey, did you think i meant that i was not an inside job ?? i think there is some misunderstanding... i 100 % believe it WAS an inside job.. i have done a lot of reasearch on this and come on tower 7 just falling down to the ground without anything gracing the buidling... obvious inside job.... Audit the Fed as well, ben bernanke is a damn crook
Tucker is an idiot, he's truly clueless.
MrCroo2u 3 weeks ago
Whoa, Building 7 just dropped and Tucker refused to even acknowledge it. Why are people like Tucker even afraid to question the events and evidence of 9/11.
JacqueFrescoTVP 1 month ago
Way to go Tucker!!! Says it like it is, these fools (truthers) have no evidence.
001mbuelow 1 month ago
@001mbuelow They have enough prove see the videos, or the interviews that clearly state that there where bombs planted in the buildings. Do you actually believe that some fools with knifes could violate the National Air Deffense System (NORAD)?? Do you believe that 19 individuals could make the most powerfull Nation in the world look like idiots?
argusmaiden 1 week ago
@argusmaiden no one infiltrated NORAD, terrorists hyjacked planes and flew them into buildings, thats all there is too it. There is no other evidence to say otherwise, which is why the entire world agrees with the official report. Excpt for a few bored losers with nothing better to do, such as yourself and the rest of the "Truthers" out there.
001mbuelow 1 week ago
@001mbuelow Not the rest of the world believes that I'm not even from USA, I just find very difficult to say that some people from a cave could make the most powerfull country in the world look like idiots just with knifes. According to the report the twin towers came down,(at nearly free fall speed, in the exact same way that a controled demolition does, they both fall EXACTLY the same way coincidently)who where hit by a plane but builiding 7 still falled down, but it wasn't even hit by a plane
argusmaiden 1 week ago
@argusmaiden no controlled demolition,no inside job, no free fall speed, just hyjacked planes flown into buildings. You do believe in previously hyjacked planes right? Its not impossible, its been done for centeries.And when one gigantic skyscaper falls on a smaller skyscraper, then the smaller skyscaper will probably fall too. What do you think, there was a third plane for NYC that just didnt make it and theUS gov said, "oh well, blow building 7 anyway, no one will notice?" Seriously, dumb!!!!
001mbuelow 1 week ago
@001mbuelow It's just a matter of opinion, if you want to believe in the official theory you can, I on the other side still believe that it was an inside job just for having an excuse for going for Iraq and Afganistan Oil.
argusmaiden 1 week ago
this is my favorite media hit piece. David Ray Griffin keeps his composure well.
SuperZack311 2 months ago
Ironic for him to say 'Journalism with very low standards'.
larry149 2 months ago
Comment removed
larry149 2 months ago
Tucker is sad! At least he took Jon Stewarts advice and lost the bow tie, but stewart was right it is all theater with Carlson. At least only retarded people take him or his "news org" seriously. And actually, the BBC is 100% better than fox. They even reported building 7 fell before it happened !( must have got the script early) Check out Jane Stanley BBC reports Salomom bros building ( WTC 7) falls before it actually does, amazing so many sheep still by the govt. lies
michaeljfo 2 months ago
@fastfox9 This is a classic misconception. The 9/11 Commission was a commission not an investigation. The investigation was done and carried out by NIST, FEMA, the FAA, the FBI, the CIA, et al. NOT the 9/11 Commission. Stop spewing this nonsense. The combined cost of the above mentioned entities investigations was well over 100 million. It's an invalid comparison, stop using it.
Oz1976 3 months ago
@fastfox9 And? Danny Jowenko only thought WTC 7 was demolished, he did NOT think 1 or 2 were and said so often. He also only thought that about WTC 7 when shown the 7 second clip of the collapse portrayed on September Mysteries without audio. He was ambushed by the "journalist" and never saw the complete damage the building sustained. DRG is a theologian with ZERO scientific background. None, nada, zilch. He's written something like 12 books on 9/11 and you don't think it's about money? ROFL
Oz1976 3 months ago
@fastfox9 David Ray Griffin hasn't proven shit aside of the fact that he's a charlatan and you're a moron for buying into his bullshit, but that's exactly what he wants...YOU to BUY his BULLSHIT. "If you read this book, and you read my other two books". He's a profiteer and you're an idiot.
Oz1976 3 months ago
Good on you, David Ray Griffin, for speaking your piece with equanimity. I can't say I would have done the same.
TaylTube 4 months ago
when i hear someone use the word "blasphemous" or "sinful" in reference to the questioning of institutions, companies, billionaires or politicians, i worry.
noisyneil 4 months ago
Tucker you a short sited idiot.
No wonder with your views there are still many who belive the US governments lies...........There is no hope for you pal.
paymydues 6 months ago
Tucker = MAD TWAT
KatTops 6 months ago
Tucker employing the Neural Linguistic Programming technique i see. Its amazing to see Tucker speak as if the media doesnt have its own agenda.....like because since he "worked" in journalism he knows all about how a story (lie) transitions into fact. Loved the fake laugh........still tryin to promote the official story i see. I dont even watch that BS because its too much WWE wrestling. News in America is a joke nowdays.
thump9 7 months ago
Griffin has no fact checking whatsoever. He is a liar and the theif selling his soul to sell a few books. Rarely does he say anything that is true. In the interview he says the 9/11 Commission omits building 7. GUESS WHAT GRIFFIN YOU MORON. 9/11 Commission wasn't tasked with studying or reporting on that area, nor the collapses of WTC 1/2. They were tasked with the events leading up to the attacks, where the govt failed to protect, ect. NIST was tasked with WTC and 7. DRG is an idiot.
mikeyt34 7 months ago
@mikeyt34 Griffin is someone who should know better. As an academic, he should know the proper way to do research and accurately convey information. Yet he intentionally misinterprets and distorts the facts. He quotes firefighters talking about explosions as if explosions could only be caused by explosives. No wonder he was theology professor. 911 truth is a religion, not a serious effort to understand reality.
bagintree 7 months ago
It's a good thing Tucker Carlson is a trust fund kid because he is one worthless, smug, arrogant piece of shit and if he didn't have a well connected family, what would this asshole do in life ?
1bassman9 8 months ago
hah, Tucker.
More like FUCKER.
LifeOfAubrey 8 months ago 2
HAHA. At 0:50, Griffin closes his eyes after Tucker shuts the fuck up, probably wondering why he agreed to be on the show with that turd nugget!
Bagelbutcher 8 months ago
well when the NWO come along hopefully not this tucker will get a slap in his face for being so ignornant
CASTILLO51 10 months ago
LOL, Griffin owned this tool. Boy, isn't it funny how the anchors on FOX News, CNN and MSNBC all have exactly the same incredulous attitude towards people who don't believe the official 9/11 sham? It's almost as if the entire American mainstream media, left, right and center, have ALL been complicit in protecting the government's sorry asses. Hmmmm....
LongLiveOx 11 months ago
Ray Griffin, Chandler and Gage. The 911 Mental defective league
roquefortfiles 1 year ago 2
Tucker is the most infuriating slug in the US excuse for a 'media'!!!!!!
CCostenjo 1 year ago 2
So Tucker is basically saying it's "Wrong, blasphemous and sinful," to question your government...? (I'm not even gonna explain what's wrong with that...just look at history) "(2:00)Why is the church spreading such a hateful message?"...Hateful message? WTF?
Check out "9/11 The Myth and The Reality" and DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH. Don't believe either of those theories...look at the facts, double check them and see what comes out...
Some of this stuff is really fucking suspicious(at the very least)
TukenNuken 1 year ago
Griffin, a "theologian". LOL! What a worthless "profession". Who would take the words of a nutjob promoter of superstition seriously anyway?
He's a socially destructive, lying, evil dumbass.
jdh501 1 year ago
Griffin is definitely not an idiot. Also why would tucker say that the BBC is a low source of journalism? It's up there with the NY times and Washington Post.
noonesflower 1 year ago
Tucker and Griffin are BOTH idiots.
buddyfreakinhoIIy 1 year ago
tucker: min 3:40 that`s a journalist?
and that is the general thought on american people
despierta america
wake up america
hendrixxx111 1 year ago
I'd love to stomp at that tool bag mother fuckers head - tucker is the biggest tool of them all. that laugh when he mentioned the bbc - DAMN what an uneducated, complicit douche bag
mit26chell 1 year ago
Tucker looks he should be puking his guts up at a kegger. He's just a shit-level Hannity clone.
JWRandall423 1 year ago
I read his book, 911 commission distortions.... fantastic facts he uncovered- too many to mention.
Other writers use him for refences, they use his words to support their books.
That is how accurate he is...
Mradamjohnboy 1 year ago
retired Fucker Oops Tucker
callitlhotmail 1 year ago
Tucker .. the worst newscaster I have ever seen!!!
ksfooooo 1 year ago
Who the f*ck is this newscaster? He is a little shit. 9/11, Iraq/Afgghanistan, Nazi all used propaganda. Wake up.
shackle5 1 year ago 2
Got to love Griffin's equivocation fallacy of "official conspiracy theory".
BTW Tucker...you're a schmuck.
grandmastershek 1 year ago
After seeing this interview, I wouldn't object to a controlled demolition with Tucker Carlson inside.
mattonbass 1 year ago
would somebody deal with these tv demons. Damn they are lowlifes. Their own families must be sooo ashamed of them.
sssssjjjj1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
PoetPussy......AGAIN!
-How do YOU explain the molten metal found under building 6 and all 3 towers?-
How many days will you run, run, run from answering this one coward?
noozilander 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
PoetPussy......AGAIN!
-How do YOU explain the molten metal found under building 6 and all 3 towers?-
How many days will you run, run, run from answering this one coward?
noozilander 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
PoetPussy......AGAIN!
-How do YOU explain the molten metal found under building 6 and all 3 towers?-
How many days will you run, run, run from answering this one coward?
noozilander 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
PoetPussy......AGAIN!
-How do YOU explain the molten metal found under building 6 and all 3 towers?-
How many days will you run, run, run from answering this one coward?
noozilander 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
PoetPussy......AGAIN!
-How do YOU explain the molten metal found under building 6 and all 3 towers?-
How many days will you run, run, run from answering this one coward?
noozilander 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
PoetPussy......AGAIN!
-How do YOU explain the molten metal found under building 6 and all 3 towers?-
How many days will you run, run, run from answering this one coward?
noozilander 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
PoetPussy......AGAIN!
-How do YOU explain the molten metal found under building 6 and all 3 towers?-
How many days will you run, run, run from answering this one coward?
noozilander 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Poetpussy says "Guess what? It was reported under WTC 6 where no one says there was a demolition."
LMAO, good boy!
You now accept the molten metal was found at ground zero under Building six which had an enormous hole blown in it before the towers collapsed too!
You seem to be coming around from your phenomenal ignorance induced coma, ya dead cunt! LOL!
Good for you liddle fella! LOL!
noozilander 1 year ago
@noozilander Yep, it was reported under WTC 6, which no one says was a controlled demolition. So much for "molten metal" being an indicator of controlled demolition, dunce. You lose.
PoetryHound 1 year ago
@PoetryHound
Good boy, you accept the molten metal found under all three towers and Building 6. Now, how do you explain the existence of molten metal Pussy? LOL!
noozilander 1 year ago
@noozilander One thing we know for sure: Thermite can't keep anything molten after the reaction ends. Despite ludicrous claims that it was all insulated but people saw this metal flowing despite its being insulated (LOL!), there's nothing that could have kept metal in a molten form except for additional energy inputs. LMAO!
PoetryHound 1 year ago
@PoetryHound ......AGAIN!
-How do YOU explain the molten metal found under building 6 and all 3 towers?-
How many days will you run, run, run from answering this one coward?
LOL!
You are such a bitch, fellatio-hound! LOL!
noozilander 1 year ago
@noozilander I already told you, asshole. The only way to keep metal in a molten form is to add energy. The only source of energy was the debris-fueled fires. Thermite or thermate or whatever it is you're claiming today can't keep anything in a molten form after the reaction ends. So whatever conglomeration of metal people saw flowing, it wasn't caused by a thermite reaction. Too bad for you, clown.
PoetryHound 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@PoetryHound ......AGAIN!
-How do YOU explain the molten metal found under building 6 and all 3 towers?-
How many days will you run, run, run from answering this one coward?
noozilander 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@PoetryHound ......AGAIN!
-How do YOU explain the molten metal found under building 6 and all 3 towers?-
How many days will you run, run, run from answering this one coward?
noozilander 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@PoetryHound ......AGAIN!
Since you raised the point about the molten steel found under building 6......
-How do YOU explain the molten metal found under building 6 and all 3 towers?-
How many days will you run, run, run from answering this one coward?
noozilander 1 year ago
@PoetryHound Supporting the government bullshit and continually contradicting what they have said is extremely dumb, coward!
Talk about shooting 'yourself' in the mouth, huh dickhead!
LMAO
noozilander 1 year ago
@noozilander It's funny how you keep contradicting yourself.
It was thermate! No wait! It was nanothermite! No wait! It was a combination of explosives and thermate!
Jews are responsible for false flag attacks. No wait! It was Zionists!
FL 77 flew over the Pentagon! No wait! It probably did hit the Pentagon!
Your running in circles is pretty amusing, but in truth your brain could use some clown-o-suction. LOL!
PoetryHound 1 year ago
@PoetryHound I have never claimed to know whether thermite, thermate or even nano-thermite was used. All I've said is that Steven Jones found the chemical signature of 'thermitic material' in the Ground Zero dust samples.
He also found some unreacted thermitic material chips and no-one (including you coward) has EVER been able to dispute that evidence. It has however been endorsed by several other scientists.
You lost dickhead. Too bad. LOL!
noozilander 1 year ago
@noozilander Well, which "chemical signature" are you referring to? Are you jumping around the same way Steven Jones is? Whatever his flavor of the day is, you'll be sure to parrot it. LOL!
No one takes his dumb chip claim seriously, especially since the chips were anti-corrosive coating. He only talked about 1 side of the composite chips & ignored the other side. That's what you truthers do - ignore anything that's inconvenient. No one has ever corroborated what his group claimed.
PoetryHound 1 year ago
@PoetryHound Zionist Jews are renowned for false flag attacks, you're dead and dead right too! LOL!
I NEVER said F77 flew over the Pentagon, you're lying AGAIN!
You suggested F77 hit the 'North wall' of the Pentagon and I corrected you by saying F77 actually hit the 'West wall', remember dickhead!
Can you actually address the topic, instead of inventing lies and attacking the character of experts that you CANNOT argue against?
Very cowardly tactics from you as per usual! LMAO!
noozilander 1 year ago
@noozilander "Jews are renowned for foals flag attacks"
Those are your original words that you're running away from. LOL!
Yeah, you never said FL 77 flew over the Pentagon. You just referenced the FDR which you said showed it at a higher elevation than the Pentagon. I'm sure you had no point to make in making that claim.
I was wrong about North. If you look at a map, the angle is actually Northwest. Unlike you, I actually checked it out. You simply regurgitate crap from some twoofer site.
PoetryHound 1 year ago
@PoetryHound Germans started WW2.
Does that make me racist too?
You are such a cocksucker, liddle fella!
LMAO!
noozilander 1 year ago
@PoetryHound says "I was wrong about North. If you look at a map, the angle is actually Northwest."
Yes you are wrong about North, you are also wrong about NW, as it is always referred to as the West side of the Pentagon!
You are wrong about a great number of things aint ya, faggy panties!
Exposed AGAIN cocksucker! LOL!
noozilander 1 year ago
@noozilander "It is always referred to as the West"
LOL, you mean by the people that you think are lying? LOL. you're so confused. What a silly little clown. LOL!
PoetryHound 1 year ago
@PoetryHound The Pentagon was hit on the 'West' side,
NOT the 'North' side or the 'Northwest' side like you said after your rapid backtracking when you realised how retarded you are, ya dead cunt!
LOL!
Your credibility is zero now, LOSER!
LMAO!
noozilander 1 year ago
@noozilander Oh, I guess you have trouble reading so I have to repeat information for you. If you would bother to look at a map, you'd see the angle is actually NW. But you're too lazy, aren't you clown?
You're a dickhead, dead cunt, fellatio-boy, etc. etc. *yawn*
PoetryHound 1 year ago
@PoetryHound It was the west side.
You started with North, then you changed to North-west, but in reality it was the WEST side of the Pentagon. What makes it especially funny is the fact you said anyone who doesn't relise it was hit on the North side is mentally retarded........and I guess you are for thinking it was the North side too, ya fuckin' dickhead!!
LMFAO!
You never seem to tire of making a cunt of yourself, fellatio-boy. LOL!
noozilander 1 year ago
@noozilander Once again, you refuse to look at a map of the trajectory. It shows a NW angle, dumbo. I had North wrong, it was NW. At least I admit errors. You never do. That's what makes you a clown.
(You're also a dickhead, cunt, fellatio-boy, etc etc. blah blah)
PoetryHound 1 year ago
@PoetryHound says "I had North wrong, it was NW. At least I admit errors."
Yes you did, fellatio-hound, and it was West not NW either.
It was more than an error though, because you implied that anyone who didn't know it was North was mentally retarded! LMFAO!
Whoops!!!!
Turns out (as always!) that you are the mental retard by your own admission, cocksucker! LOL!
noozilander 1 year ago
@noozilander Why should I believe bullshit from you? You never back up a single assertion. And you can never admit when you're wrong, continuing to claim the BBC never retracted their hijackers-are-alive report when I showed you the retraction! You've got a truly enormous ego if you can't even admit you're wrong about the retraction. But that's okay. It's just more entertainment for me! I get to keep shoving it in your face! LOL!
Cocksucker dickhead fellatio-boy, etc. etc. blah blah
PoetryHound 1 year ago
@PoetryHound Retraction? LMAO!
The BBC changed the wording in the article to say 'a man named Waleed Al shehri', instead of simply 'Waleed Al shehri', you deceitful lying cunt! LOL!
That might be a retraction in your tiny mind, fellatio-hound, but not to anyone else coward!
Can you be anymore pathetic with your lies, or are you maxed out akready?
LMAO!
noozilander 1 year ago
@noozilander The BBC corrected their error, you moron. God, you're dumb. You claim it wasn't a retraction when that's precisely what it was. You're exposed for being a circus clown. LOL!
Oh yeah, you're also a cunt, fellatio-boy, dickhead, cocksucker, blah blah blah
PoetryHound 1 year ago
@PoetryHound says "The BBC corrected their error."
They didn't make the error, fellatio-hound, the FBI clearly did.
The BBC simply changed the FBI photo caption to read "A man named Waleed Al shehri"
That does NOT constitute a retraction, coward!
You are getting more and more desperate by the hour, you gutless sycophant! LOL!
noozilander 1 year ago
@noozilander You're so afraid to admit that the BBC retracted their report. Sorry, it's staring you right in the face. They no longer claim any hijackers are alive. They stated it was a case of mistaken identity. You can no longer claim the BBC as a source for your wacky claim that one of the hijackers is still alive.
PoetryHound 1 year ago
@PoetryHound -"In an effort to make this clearer, we have made one small change to the original story. Under the FBI picture of Waleed al Shehri we have added the words "A man called Waleed Al Shehri..."-
"...a small change..." LMFAO!
So much for your fantasy about a retraction, fellatio-hound!
Keep swallowing coward! LOL!
noozilander 1 year ago
@noozilander What you refuse to accept is that the BBC went back and made the change in order to retract their claim that the the hijacker and the living person are two different people. Why else go back and make the chance, nutjob? The photos don't match, their pre-911 movements don't match. It was mistaken identity, which you're the only one in the world that fails to comprehend. LOL!
PoetryHound 1 year ago
@PoetryHound They made the small wording change under the photo, but they retained the fact that Waleed Al shehri was definitely the same one referred to by the FBI and when they asked the FBI for clarification, all the FBI could say was that they were confident they had the right suspects! LOL!
So there was NO retraction, the FBI couldn't explain why Waleed Al shehri was alive and they have NEVER revised their incorrect list of suspects!
Exposed AGAIN Liar. LOL!
noozilander 1 year ago
@noozilander Hey clown, why did you stop chasing your tail? It's so much fun to watch you claim NIST investigators are all liars except when you say they aren't. Hahahaha. I love it. How about the media? You can do the same thing and claim they're all lying except when you say they're not! Hahahaha! Your confusion is my entertainment! Assclown. LOL!
PoetryHound 1 year ago
@PoetryHound says "the terrorists stole the passports of Saudi pilots with the same names."
Keep swallowing coward!
LOL!
noozilander 1 year ago
@noozilander "the terrorists stole the passports"
How would they have gotten the passports, clown? What a stupid claim you make. ANd you're too dumb to realize you're arguing against yourself.
LOLOL!
Still claiming there was another "incident" at the Pentagon that caused the damage and not FL 77? LOL!
PoetryHound 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@PoetryHound says "the terrorists stole the passports of Saudi pilots with the same names."
This is your fantasy, Poetpussy!
I'm waiting for YOU to explain it, cocksucker! LOL!
noozilander 1 year ago
@noozilander says"the terrorists stole the passports of the Saudi pilots with the same name"
No they didn't. Those are your words and your fanstasy, you silly little clown. Just shows how low you'll go by claiming I said that. Hey, why don't you blame da Joos for the mistaken identity, bigot? LOL!
PoetryHound 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@PoetryHound says"the terrorists stole the passports of the Saudi pilots with the same name"
Back-tracking on this fantasy now too, coward?
When did you lose your testicles?
LOL!
noozilander 1 year ago
@PoetryHound says "The BBC pictured the wrong guy"
You dumb shit, the photo that the BBC showed came from the FBI, so the FBI obviously got the wrong guy, sphincter licker.
LMFAO!
noozilander 1 year ago
Comment removed
noozilander 1 year ago
Comment removed
noozilander 1 year ago
Comment removed
noozilander 1 year ago
Comment removed
noozilander 1 year ago
Comment removed
noozilander 1 year ago
Comment removed
noozilander 1 year ago
I think Tucker was wearing a diaper during that interview. I think he crapped his pants.
jamezbond78 1 year ago
Tucker Carlson is stereotypical of all the government story swallowers. He's incredulous because he is incapable of independent thought.
noozilander 1 year ago
@noozilander omg I love you so much for saying this.
Alberto9871 5 months ago
More like church U.S. Government-sanctioned conspiracy church. You have to be a devout believer to think the Marx Brothers were running air defense on 9-11.
FooFooTheClown 1 year ago
Griffin isn't a demo expert. No demo experts say explosives brought down the twin towers. None.
PoetryHound 1 year ago
@PoetryHound says "No demo experts say explosives brought down the twin towers."
They wouldn't get many government demolition jobs if they did now would they, simpering coward!
Do you ever set foot outside your closet, faggy panties? LOL!
noozilander 1 year ago
@noozilander
No demo experts IN THE WORLD say explosives brought down the twin towers, not even ones in countries that hate America. None.
If you think all US demo experts would remain silent, & all highrise structural engineers, forensic engineers, metallurgists, fire protection engineers, & physicists would remain silent, you're simply revealing what YOU would do if you were one of these experts. YOU'D remain silent. Wow, what great character you have. LOL!
PoetryHound 1 year ago
@PoetryHound Danny Jowenko took one look at the demolition of wtc 7 and said "yes, that's controlled demolition, without doubt!"
(He's a top European demo expert, you LOSER lol!)
Many Physicists, architects, engineers, firemen, scholars etc etc etc ARE calling for another investigation, you ignorant cunt!
Why do you feel the need to lie and be exposed like an idiot constantly, coward?
noozilander 1 year ago
@noozilander We're talking about the twin tower, not WTC 7, you ignorant piece of shit! But since you raised Jowenko, do you know what he said about the twin towers? That they were NOT demo jobs. Still think he's credible? Or was he suddenly paid off and started lying? Hahaha! What a confused jerk you are. You are crushed once again! LOL!
PoetryHound 1 year ago
@PoetryHound Danny Jowenko agreed without any coaching that wtc 7 was controlled demolition. That means inside job, end of story!
No buildings the size of the towers have been demolished before so he would know the method they used obviously. Remember you cried about no demo workers saying there was controlled demolition and you have been proved wrong AGAIN coward! LOL!
You really are a very poor loser.....
noozilander 1 year ago
@noozilander The interviewer didn't tell Jowenko that WTC 7 it had major fires raging in it (according to FDNY), or that in footage with sound there is no sign of detonation charges, or that the collapse was expected by FDNY & other experts on the scene, or that there were no traces of detonation charges in the seismic record. So he didn’t have all the info that would have been useful to make a judgment. And if you think Jowenko is credible, note that he says WTC 1 & 2 were NOT demolitions.
PoetryHound 1 year ago
@PoetryHound Danny Jowenko is a demolition expert!
He knows fires do not do his job for him, so he didn't need to know that the buildings were on fire!
Try again fool, I'm going to bed.
noozilander 1 year ago
@noozilander Read carefully: Jowenko wasn't given all the information, dumbshit.
PoetryHound 1 year ago
@PoetryHound says "Read carefully: Jowenko wasn't given all the information"
LMAO!
You mean he wasn't coached in how to lie and just gave an honest appraisal on what he'd seen instead.
LMFAO @ "wasn't given all the information!" How pathetic do you get COWARD!
noozilander 1 year ago
@noozilander The interviewer didn't tell Jowenko how much damage was caused by WTC1, that it had major fires raging in it (according to FDNY), that in footage with sound there is no sign of detonation charges, that there's no trace of detonation charges in the seismic record, and that the collapse was expected by FDNY & other experts on the scene. That information was withheld. So yes, he didn’t have all the info that would have been useful to make a judgment.
PoetryHound 1 year ago
@PoetryHound Awwww poor liddle Pussy. LOL! Is it not fair that they didn't tell Danny that there were numerous explosions around ground zero that day, molten metal found under all three towers, the FDNY evacuated not long before the demolition, NIST said the towers did not significantly damage WTC 7 and it collapsed due to fire alone.........
Danny just knew it was controlled demolition anyway, without LIARS like you coaching him.
noozilander 1 year ago
@noozilander Explosions are common in fires, you nutcase. Molten metal is not an indicator of demolition. Guess what? It was reported under WTC 6 where no one says there was a demolition. So much for the molten metal nonsense.
The FDNY moved everyone back from WTC 7 after they determined the building was unstable. Thanks for reminding me. The interviewer didn't tell Jowenko that either.
Once again, if you think Jowenko is credible, he said the twin towers were NOT CDs. LOL!
PoetryHound 1 year ago
Comment removed
noozilander 1 year ago
Comment removed
noozilander 1 year ago
@noozilander "NIST said the towers did not significanly damage WTC 7"
Oh, so you think NIST is credible? Good. After all, the NIST investigators from the government, universities, and private firms have expertise and experience. Guess what they said caused the collapse of WTC 7? Still think they're credible? Or do you get to decide which things they said are true and which are false? LOL. what a funny clown you are!
PoetryHound 1 year ago
@PoetryHound NIST were charged with investigating the crime and you support them in everything they say, fellatio-hound.
I'm just pointing out where your story contradicts the government bullshit and they said the towers did NOT significantly damage WTC 7! LOL!
If you have questions about the government propaganda you are not alone, Pussy.
You no doubt LIVE alone in a trailer park, but you are not alone in questioning NISTs report! LMAO!
noozilander 1 year ago
@noozilander You cited NIST to support a point you wanted to make. Thus, you find them credible on that point. LOL!!!! So you pick and choose which things they said that you think are correct and which are incorrect. That's funny! It's another example of your dishonesty. I love watching you shoot yourself in the foot. LOL!
PoetryHound 1 year ago
@PoetryHound I cited NIST to destroy your fantasy about the Towers causing damage to WTC 7 Pussy! LOL!
The NIST story is the one YOU give your undying, unquestioning support to and then you contradict the information they have proposed!
You are just to stupid to realise how often you contradict yourself, aint ya fellatio-hound!
LMFAO!
noozilander 1 year ago
Comment removed
noozilander 1 year ago
@noozilander You cited NIST because you thought what they said was correct. So you get to decide for yourself which things they say are correct and which are incorrect, right? One minute you're condemning NIST and the next minute you're referencing them as a credible source. Hahahaha. That's funny! That's what makes you a clown.
PoetryHound 1 year ago
@PoetryHound My citing of NIST information is simply to show you how you are contradicting the same authors of the fairy tale that you give your undying support to fellatio-boy!
They said the towers collapse did not cause significant structural damage to WTC 7 (which is true) and you claimed the exact opposite! LOL!
You are a simply a stupid contradiction yourself, swallower! LMAO!
noozilander 1 year ago
@noozilander Liar. You cite NIST to back up your own points when it's convenient to do so - like that the debris damage from WTC 1 didn't cause WTC 7 to collapse (I never claimed the opposite btw). THAT'S why you cite them. But then you're quick to turn around and dismiss them when it suits you. I actually don't mind you being so two-faced because it's good for laughs and proves you're a circus clown. LMAO!
PoetryHound 1 year ago
@PoetryHound If you didn't keep contradicting NIST, I wouldn't have to keep pointing out your idiocy, snivelly coward! LOL!
noozilander 1 year ago
@noozilander It's hilarious how you can't decide whether the things NIST reported are credible or not. I love watching you chase your tail!
PoetryHound 1 year ago
@PoetryHound NIST are in the main not credible, but the fact that you keep contradicting your own favourite fairy tale, authored by NIST, just means that you are too childlike to comprehend how this discredits you totally.
You're simply a bad joke now, fellatio-boy! LOL!
noozilander 1 year ago
@noozilander "NIST are in the main not credible"
LOLOLOL! You're still doing it! You agree with what they say when you think it helps you conspiracy fairytale and say they're wrong when they say something you don't want to believe. That's funny! It's one of the things that makes you a kook. That's what kooks do!
PoetryHound 1 year ago
@PoetryHound I don't agree with NIST overall because they conclude with lies, but I do enjoy pointing out when you contradict their story with your own bullshit and you are supposed to be in full agreement with them!
You are just too dumb to be quiet when you make a load of yourself, liddle fella! LOL!
noozilander 1 year ago
@noozilander I've never contradicted NIST, but it sure is funny how you can't decide whether they're credible or not. What's hilarious is when you cite something they say as being credible and then turn around and claim they're not credible. Except when you say so. That's what makes you a funny circus clown. LOL
PoetryHound 1 year ago
@PoetryHound You claimed the towers caused damage to WTC 7 and that damage added to the collapse of WTC 7. Turns out NIST don't agree with you, LOSER!
Exposed AGAIN, dickhead! LMAO!
noozilander 1 year ago
@noozilander Read more carefully, clown. I said the towers caused damage to WTC 7. However, I never said the damage added to the collapse. That's your misinterpretation. NIST said the damage didn't contribute to the collapse, although perhaps that's not true if you think NIST isn't credible. LOL! I love how you tie yourself in knots going back and forth about whether they told the truth. You're a true clown! Honk honk! You're exposed for being liar and a clown.
PoetryHound 1 year ago
@PoetryHound Backtracking AGAIN huh, coward!
You said the towers falling caused structural damage to WTC 7 and now you're running away from your claim after being exposed as a fool and a coward once again.
Get a spine, ya snivelling coward! LMFAO!
noozilander 1 year ago
@noozilander You need a remedial reading class, coward!
I never said the debris damage to the building contributed to the collapse. That's just your the deranged conspiracy voices in you head talking to you. It's your dementia, assclown.
How ironic that it turns out to be you that's the sniveling coward. LMFAO!
PoetryHound 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@PoetryHound says "I never said the debris damage to the building contributed to the collapse."
LMAO!
Run, run, run, little pussy. Wipe your snivelly nose before your next sycophantic fellatio client, Princess!
noozilander 1 year ago
@PoetryHound says "We're talking about the twin tower, not WTC 7"
Doesn't matter, liddle coward, All 3 events were part of the same incident and were all on the same day.
(You should at least try to retain the basics of the story in your tiny mind, coward! LOL!)
noozilander 1 year ago
@noozilander "Doesn't matter"
Of course it does. Not a single demo expert from any country says explosives brought down the towers. But of course, you think they're all stupid or scared and you claim it was a demo because you say so. With no corroboration or substantiation, as usual. Just the same old because-I-say-so craplola. LOL!
PoetryHound 1 year ago
@PoetryHound Fire doesn't perform controlled demolitions, ya dead shit, no matter how insane you choose to be MORON! lol!
Danny Jowenko said clearly it was controlled demo and now you're pouting because you are proved wrong AGAIN!
noozilander 1 year ago
@noozilander Nope, you're wrong. Jowenko did not say WTC 1 & 2 were demo'd. You got that wrong. He said they were NOT demo'd, dumbshit. Whenever kooks are backed into a corner on the twin towers, they try to change the subject to WTC 7 and vice versa. LOL, what a pathetically transparent con they attempt. You're retarded.
PoetryHound 1 year ago
@PoetryHound says "Nope, you're wrong. Jowenko did not say WTC 1 & 2 were demo'd."
Did I ever mention Jowenkos thoughts on the towers, Pussy? No I didn't did I! LOL!
You're just sad you are.
Danny Jowenko explicitly stated that 'WTC 7' was controlled demolition, he had NO doubt! LOL!
Kind of destroys your fantasy that all demo experts agree with you doesn't it LIAR!
Exposed AGAIN coward! LOLOLOL!
noozilander 1 year ago
@noozilander If you think Jowenko is credible, note that he said WTC 1 & 2 were NOT demos. Looks like you'll run away from that just like you run away from all the facts. Jowenko pretty much destroys your fairytale fantasy that the twin towers were demo'd. LOLOLOL!
PoetryHound 1 year ago
@PoetryHound You have only backed your self into a corner with all your gutless lying coward.
Simply because you can't answer facts about the towers and WTC 7, you are now whining that it is unfair to discuss both! LOL!
Christ you are a frightened little pussy aint ya!
LMAO!
noozilander 1 year ago
@noozilander Because you can't answer facts about WT 1 & 2, you change the subject to WTC 7. LOLOL! Example: When told no demo expert says explosives brought down the twin towers, you respond with Jowenko who only talked about the demo of WTC 7. LOLOL! You are a pathetic and ignorant little child. LMAO!
PoetryHound 1 year ago
Comment removed
noozilander 1 year ago
@noozilander Remember loser, not a single expert in building demolitions says explosives brought down the twin towers. Not one. In the world.
Hey! Why don't make a stupid assertion such as they're all afraid of being assassinated by the CIA! That's about your speed, you paranoid moron! LMAO!
PoetryHound 1 year ago
Tucker is represents the "low standard" of american journalism.
Movickrox 1 year ago
It's funny Tucker refers to Griffin's thoughts on and inside job as "blasphemous." Does Tucker consider members of the Bush administation to be religious figures?
TheStroomis 1 year ago
Keep in mind that the news networks are runed and controlled by the international bankers that are behind the government, of course that stupid guy is trying to deviate the actual message of Dr. Griffin and trying to make him look crazy. The evidence is clear and doesn't need to be supported, it supports itself......
gil84rs 1 year ago
Tucker is an arrogant horse's ass! What is HIS evidence that the government wasn't guilty?? He has none! He merely states the government is not responsible with no evidence to back that up! Unless it was burning jet fuel! LOL!!!
livnfree930 1 year ago
What a kunt
phatcontrolla 1 year ago
Tucker, you're a joke. Not a journalist. Scum in the flesh.
Seigu007 1 year ago 2
funny how he can parody English journalism when Fox TV exists.....
granger18trains 1 year ago 2
building 7 went down.....a miracle perhaps ?
granger18trains 1 year ago 2
Tucker, you are a COMPLETE JOKE. You are a totally ignorant, sorry excuse for a journalist, and human being. I'll echo the comment below because it descibes you perfectly. You are definitely a FUCKTARD.
muhser1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Yes our Zionist 9/11- Truth Movement for the Zionist New World Order,
Make sure that all the Zionist (and Israelis) are save, and yes
9/11 was an Zionist Job for the Zionist New World Order
War on Peace and blood for oil.
BigWhoreHouseIsrael 1 year ago
Tucker: "Hello Mr. Griffin, you haven no evidence that the government's behind 9/11, I frankly think it's an awful thing to allege, considering it's not true and you haven't proved that it is!"
Griffin: *rolls eyes and smiles*
FUCKING. PRICELESS. First off.
And what a way to start the discussion, second...
SexyMelon 1 year ago
Comment removed
SexyMelon 1 year ago
Tucker Carlson is a flunky and a propagandist, truly a pitiable human being.
ted2u2 1 year ago 3
You're such a dissapointment Tucker, working for Fox now? How low can you go man.Thanks for inviting this couragious man on your msnbc show though!!!
josgvis 1 year ago
With a snotty name like Tucker what would you expect.
canaan1967 1 year ago
Tucker needs to put his pink bow tie back on and so some reading.
cliffhammond 1 year ago
Remember: all hes saying is that he used to agree with the offical report, then he looked into it personally, now because of the evidence we have today is not consistant with with offical report, alot of questions unanswered and the questions answered dont make sense and produce more questions lmao, more and more people are looking into it themselves and are finding out that exactly what this man here is saying is true, ask yourself this, if it wasnt true then why are more people believing it?
BillyBobBizWorth 1 year ago 2
They never have enough time to let the guy finish, the come up with assumptions. But "I don't wanna cut you off, unfortunelly w'ere out of time" blah blah blah. They can't face any fact, and voer everything up with accustic jamming the interviewed person. The same thing happened to prof. Jones and others. They're trying to make a nutcase of everyone even trying to ask difficult questions. And these guy Tucker is one of the worst tv reporters I saw in my life.
JJTechnologies 1 year ago
damn that reporter is stupid, he has no evidence that is wasnt an inside and all he says is it isnt true.. we would report that if it was true..haha please,,,
heightboosting 1 year ago
lol one simple word for Talker instead of Tucker. "IDIOT" wow he just committed 10 different argument fallacy's in less than 6 minutes lol. And we allow Traitors like Tucker on our manipulated bought out media? lol no surprise there...
Go Mr. Griffin!
Annuunnaki 1 year ago 3
Yes, Tucker... British journalism has low standards, just like American journalism.
What a scum bag.
I thought we used to shot traitors in this country.
bofors7715 1 year ago
Fuck Tucker. He's a close dubya family friend. Let Tucker show the proof Bin Layin' Low did it.
horrorandmetalfan001 1 year ago
Tucker admits he's a blue blood.
odin422 1 year ago
@odin422 and probably a zionist too
TokaCola 1 year ago
Tucker=shit.
odin422 1 year ago 4
its funny how people who do not think it was an inside job use the lousy arguement " it just isnt true , it didnt happen" and the people who do believe it was an inside job provide nailing evidence after evidence.. it is so obvious that it was an inside job... tons of evidence
heightboosting 1 year ago
@heightboosting Of course 9/11 was done by the globalists. They have established their Central Banks in the States, have Americans enslaved with taxation now it is time to establish their banks around the world. It makes compete sense to create war to justify there outcome to establish global banking system. "Never question us, Obey the law we create for you, Destroy the Constitution". Our government has been high jacked since 1913, those who take office are central banking scums not Americans.
Annuunnaki 1 year ago
@Annuunnaki hey, did you think i meant that i was not an inside job ?? i think there is some misunderstanding... i 100 % believe it WAS an inside job.. i have done a lot of reasearch on this and come on tower 7 just falling down to the ground without anything gracing the buidling... obvious inside job.... Audit the Fed as well, ben bernanke is a damn crook
heightboosting 1 year ago
@heightboosting no bro i was just adding to your story i know what you said. I agreed with you!
Annuunnaki 1 year ago