Friday, September 21, 2018

On being retarded

by Charles Harmison (writer), Kauai, Hawaii, October 16, 2006


Well Trey Parker and Matt Stone have stuck it to me this time. I never thought I could be the butt of their jokes as I am no Scientologist, I don't play WOW (you'll know if you do), I don't really car

Well Trey Parker and Matt Stone have stuck it to me this time. I never thought I could be the butt of their jokes as I am no scientologist, I don't play WOW (you'll know if you do), I don't really care for Streisand, and generally speaking I fear Mel Gibson. But I guess there's room for everybody on their list of people to offend.

In case you didn't see the episode yet and you planned to, (although I'm not sure how that's possible as comedy central has aired it incessantly since its first appearance) I don't want to be the spoiler and tell you the ending. I'm going to in a second so I'd stop reading now and go turn on your T.V. (it will be on soon trust me). If you don't care about South Park or if you do and you saw that episode you'll already know, the episode called anyone who believes the government was somehow behind the 9/11 attacks retarded. It proposes the Bush administration wants us to believe they're the criminal masterminds that conspiracy web sites such as propound them to be. It even goes as far as saying that Kyle had something to do with it, something which perhaps Mr. Gibson might agree, Kyle being Jewish and all.

I'm not here to argue with the validity of their claims; however I would like to speak in defense of all us retards out there. First of all I'm no conspiracy buff I like to believe that generally speaking Ockham's razor is a foolproof explanation to most mysteries. Aliens didn't kidnap Elvis, the X Files are a works of fiction, and I'm pretty sure that JFK was shot by a mad ex-KGB sniper (although on that pretty sure means I have no idea). Most conspiracy theories are full of holes and now that I think of it wasn't Mel Gibson in a movie with just such a theme . . . strange coincidences indeed.

That said I also ascribe to another law of solving mysteries proposed by the greatest sleuth ever. "Once you eliminate the impossible whatever remains however improbable must be the truth." I'll call that Doyle's Pipe. With this line of logic I come to the heart of what I'd like to say. There are a few impossibilities in the official story of 9/11. The evidence surrounding the most intricate and devastating terror attacks in history seems not to point solely to nineteen "pissed off Muslims" to quote Stan. Whether to cover up ineptitude or outright involvement I don't wish to speculate here however there seems to be more to the story than we are being told.

I would normally agree with Trey and Matt (i.e. Stan and Kyle) that 1/4 of this country is reasonably slow, and people like Cartman should almost never be trusted. But what I hope hasn't occurred are their political biases and brilliant comedic writings covering over an investigation that should in fact be re-opened. Why close the book on something that was this devastating? Don't architects need to know how to make skyscrapers jet fuel proof? Wouldn't you feel better if your government was proven innocent? If they screwed up well I guess than we'll have to let history and America forgive them (we will). If they're so certain that there is nothing to explain the attacks other than "pissed off Muslims" then why only invest 1/60 the amount of money spent looking into Clinton's sex life investigating the World Trade Center's collapse? Wouldn't we only gain from this investigation and help prevent ourselves from being vulnerable to similar attacks again? To prevent that knowledge seems truly retarded.

Now I’m not suggesting that Trey Parker and Matt Stone are somehow preventing this investigation with their cartoon. Believe me I think I have things fully in perspective with regard to the fact that it is on a comedy network and I should lighten up on criticizing computer generated fourth graders. What I do know is that everyone has political biases and Trey and Matt are no exceptions. When I say everyone I also must include places such as, one of the first of the conspiracy sites to level harsh criticism against the episode. It's perhaps best that popular culture is indeed asking itself out loud what the heck happened. Perhaps this is just what South Park was aiming for. I bet they'll never tell if it was.

Finally I would like to point anyone who would like to learn more about this investigation or anyone who'd like to check my sources to a Google video circulating the internets.
If you feel that by simply watching this hour and twenty minute documentary you will join the ranks of us retards out there I ask you to consider yourself carefully. Sometimes history will tell of a different idiot than the one the present day currently shows. Perhaps in this case as was the case with Kyle's mom Cartman has hit the nail right IN the head.

About the Writer

Charles Harmison is a writer for BrooWaha. For more information, visit the writer's website.
Want to write articles too? Sign up & become a writer!

3 comments on On being retarded

Log In To Vote   Score: 0
By CDriK on October 17, 2006 at 10:23 am
I watched with close attention the various documentaries and interviews presenting conspiracy theories for 9/11. I believed only a few minutes to them, mostly because as a french, it signifies anti-americanism. But I'm more than happy that american citizens are pushing to do investigations on this case.
 Report abuse

Log In To Vote   Score: -2
By D. E. Carson on October 21, 2006 at 03:06 am
Grab a soda and have a seat, you're going to be here for a while... I watched the video you listed in your article. I've also seen the Meyssan attempt to explain what happened at the Pentagon. Read my reply to the video and then see if you really still think the video is truth or if it is the biggest pile of horse muffins you've ever seen. The question of the number of passengers on the flights. Okay, so the video is suggesting that American Airlines and United Airlines were "in" on the government plot? The manifests of the four planes have been confirmed. In order for the claim made to be factual, the airlines would have had to have been somehow convinced to allow those four planes to take off at their confirmed load. Never mind that the airlines themselves recommend flying on Tuesdays, Wednesdays or Thursdays because they have fewer booked seats! ========================= What purpose would hitting the Pentagon serve? If this were an "inside" job, the military would not have allowed anything to hit the Pentagon. Also, the Pentagon is built mainly of steel and limestone a significantly more dense material than the steel of the World Trade Center towers. Therefore less of the plane would have survived in tact. ========================= How could the military have failed to protect Washington and the Pentagon? Well since Bill Clinton decided to cut the military budget, it is entirely possible that there weren't enough resources available on that day. Not to mention that there is not one single person in this country that could have comprehended something of this magnitude. ========================= Eric Hufschmid - Clouds of Concrete. What year, exactly, did he graduate from MIT with a degree in structural engineering? If you take concrete and you actually apply the kinds of force exerted in the collapse of the Twin Towers, you will see the concrete actually be crushed! A child with a hammer can crush concrete into powder! I should know, I've done it! ========================== The photo of a dog searching the rubble: where is his harness? Search and Rescue (SAR) dogs wear harnesses. Also, this dog is looking up at the camera, SAR dogs will **NEVER** look up at a camera man. They are trained to keep their noses as close to the ground as possible and their training includes "distraction" training, where something is introduced that could distract the dog. This is NOT an SAR dog. ========================== If Flight 77 did not crash into the Pentagon, then what happened to the people on the plane and the plane itself? Again, to cover this up the plot would have had to require American Airlines to be willing to let the government destroy one of its $70 million Boeing 757's, murder an entire flight crew and risk the kind of financial hardships the airline industry suffered after 9/11. Not to mention they would have had to be in on the plot from the beginning -- something I doubt very highly could be kept secret. So why hasn't anyone come forward with this kind of information? If it were true, it would have come out in 2004 to keep George W. Bush from being re-elected. I mean, why let George W. Bush continue to be president if he were guilty of this kind of plot? I know -- BECAUSE THERE WAS NO U.S. GOVERNMENT PLOT!!! =========================== The claim that "a few Arabs" carried out this plot. Yeah, a few Arabs that were claimed by Osama bin Laden as his people! Now you've got the president conspiring with a known enemy of the United States!!! Where will the stupidity end??? =========================== Thierry Meyssan, a MAN in France analyzing the Pentagon attack. Where'd you say his engineering degree was conferred? Oh yeah, you didn't -- probably because HE DOESN'T HAVE ONE!!! =========================== Meyssan claims a truck bomb was responsible for the Pentagon damage. Exactly how did a truck get close enough to the Pentagon without causing some kind of military defense activity? Then, let's go back to Oklahoma City for a moment. When the Ryder truck exploded in front of the Murrah Building, there was a crater left in the street from the explosion. I saw the crater with my own eyes and every account of the OKC bomb references the crater. So, we go back to the Pentagon and we look at the photos, where is the crater? There should have been a crater at least three times the size of the one in front of the Murrah Building because the amount of explosives needed for a truck bomb to cause the damage at the Pentagon would have had to be HUGE! Probably 25 to 50 times greater than the damage in Oklahoma City. "It's for sure this weren't no fertilizer bomb!" =========================== "Theres a lot of rubble inside the Pentagon including in tact chairs, desks, even an unburned book." The same was true for Oklahoma City. "But there were no luggage, seats" or other things that survive a plane crash. There wasn't a lot left of the Ryder truck in Oklahoma City either! Did we forget that the Boeing 757 that hit the Pentagon was LOADED with fuel? Usually when a plane crashes, there is more debris because there is almost no fuel left. Look at the debris of a plane that crashed on take off -- usually there is very little of that plane left because the fuel creates a larger fireball and destroys more of the plane. Most of the crashes that have debris happen as the plane is landing when most of the fuel has been burned off. I only need to point you to the crash of United Flight 91 in Pennsylvania. If you look at the pictures of that crash, there aren't a lot of whole pieces left of that plane... ========================== Would anyone care to look carefully at the images of the plane hitting the Pentagon? They have been doctored in some way. The most glaring of that is the timestamp on the image itself. It reads: "Sep. 12, 2001, 17:37:19" The Flight 77 struck the Pentagon on the morning of Tuesday, September 11, 2001. This photo would have you believe that it happened on Wednesday, September 12, 2001 at 5:37 in the AFTERNOON!!! Almost 36 hours after the real event. Now I cannot speak to the authenticity of the photos -- whether or not they came from the military, but I will say that I doubt the military OR the FBI would release something with that glaring of an error on it -- especially if they were trying to cover up a conspiracy! Never mind that in the lower right hand corner, is the word "PLANE". Even conspiracy theorists have to admit that there is no way the Pentagon would have done that, not to mention that if Meyssan was using a live feed from Washington to see those photos (which he could have only done if he were a HACKER), the timestamp would not have been 36 hours ahead of Washington -- it's only five hours difference from Washington to London, England! In which case the time stamp would have been only about 2:30 in the afternoon on September 11! ========================== Comparison of damage to WTC vs Pentagon. The facade of the WTC towers were mostly steel and glass. The facade of the Pentagon is LIMESTONE. Take your car and ram it into a steel/glass facade building then ram it into the facade of a limestone building. Which do you think will do more damage to your car? Remember, the Pentagon was built in the 1950's to withstand a nuclear blast. So, it is going to decimate a 757 on impact without so much as a shudder. Even the concept of a missile attack on the Pentagon is flimsy. A missile striking the Pentagon would have done LESS damage because missiles are smaller than planes! ========================= Questioning the witness testimony: A silver plane. Only one airline has "silver" planes: American Airlines. How many people really know how big is a 757 from the ground? Can people really judge the size of a plane from the ground when very few ever get to stand on the ground next to one? ========================= The claim of the white smoke trail. Didn't someone in this video say that the Pentagon has a missile defense system? Could the white smoke be from a defensive missile trying to shoot down the approaching 757? Oh, wait, that conflicts with the conspiracy. ========================= How did Flight 77 get to the Pentagon? When 77 disappeared from radar, it was because the terrorists turned off the transponder. It is the transponder that causes the "blip" on the radar screen, not the plane itself. The radar systems used by US air traffic control rely on the transponder for the signal. This helps differentiate among planes, birds, hot air balloons and other airborne craft. It also helps them identify each plane individually. Also, the image shown on the radar screen that looks like a plane is not really what the radar system "sees" when it is sweeping the sky. To a radar operator, a 757 is the same size as a hot air balloon or a Cessna. It is the transponders that help differentiate among those vehicles. The reason the "blip" returned is because one of the terrorists turned the transponder back on. Whether by accident or on purpose, no one knows, but I assure you that if this were an inside job, the transponders would have been turned off and left off no matter what. Perhaps it was the terrorists saying, "ha ha!" ========================== So, the 9/11 hijackers were flying above clouds? As I recall the weather for most of the Eastern United States that morning was unusually clear. Look at the footage of the first plane hitting the first tower (yes, that footage does exist. Only one camera and one photographer and it was a random chance, but guess what, it happened). The skies over New York, Washington and Boston that morning were very clear. It would not have been difficult at all to find the dollar George Washington threw over the Potomac on that day let alone the WTC and the Pentagon. ========================== Who financed the 9/11 hijackers? Osama bin Laden! He admitted to it on al Jezzera! Even if the 9/11 Commission failed to acknowledge it, the whole world knows who it was. =========================== This movie is a joke. It demands that the viewer: 1)never EVER actually read the 9/11 commission report and 2)accept that George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, the ENTIRE United States Military Establishment, American and United Airlines, Osama bin Laden, the cities of New York and Washington, D.C., the FBI, CIA and FEMA as well as every single Republican member of the United States Congress all participated in a conspiracy to commit murder in the name of a war. I have an easier time believing that John F. Kennedy was assassinated by the Mafia than I do this! =========================== On the collapse of WTC7. It is said in this video that Larry Silverstein, landlord of Building 7 ordered that building imploded to collect the insurance money. It is also vehemently defended that the building was brought down in a controlled demolition. WHAT?!? Okay, in order for that building to have been brought down in a controlled demolition, the building would have had to have been "closed" at various times while the explosives were placed in the building. Also, to get maximum effect, demolition experts do not wrap the explosives around support columns, they place them INSIDE the columns. This causes the columns to effectively be blown out from under the building so that it will fall straight down. This means they have to drill into the columns. Somebody would have noticed!!! Especially those working on the first floor. Any demolition expert will tell you that the shock wave method (wrapping explosives around a column) is unpredictable at best as a means of imploding a building. When experts demolish a building, you see the shock wave of the charges blow debris out of the building. In the video of the collapse of WTC7, there is no such debris being evacuated from the building in such a manner. The same goes for WTC 1 & 2. ========================== The video would have me believe that Mr. Silverstein would willingly go on PBS and publicly admit that he ordered a building to be imploded. The video demands that I accept that the term "pull it" is only used to mean set off the charges in a building. Again, it would take longer than seven hours to set enough charges to demolish WTC7. So now we have added an entire professional demolition firm to our list of co-conspirators for 9/11. After all, the New York Fire Department doesn't train firemen to implode buildings and we have to have the demolition firm in place to make sure that the FDNY does not have to be included in the conspiracy. Fascinating! =========================== In the explanation of the collapse of WTC7, the narrator explains that buildings are imploded by blowing the interior prior to the exterior so that as the interior collapses, it pulls the exterior in with it. I didn't see that in the collapse of WTC7. That whole building went straight down. Even with the implosion of the remains of the Murrah Building in Oklahoma City, the middle collapsed first, then went the outer walls. As a side note to the collapse of WTC 1 & 2, the impact of the planes wrecked the center core of the towers. They were not built like most people believe. There were no columns in the middle of the floors. The Twin Towers were designed not to have floor columns holding up the ceiling and the floor above. The weight of the building rested on the outer facade and the central core. The central core also held the stair wells and the elevator shafts. The weight of each floor was carried to the facade and the core by the steel trusses that were the floors and ceilings. When the planes struck the towers, the vertical facade was weakened causing the load of the building to be transferred to other vertical beams of the facade. This made parts of the facade have to carry more weight than it was used to or designed to do. ============================ How did fire bring down WTC 1, 2 & 7? Okay, it's like this. This video assumes (poorly I might add) that there was nothing in these buildings but steel and jet fuel. Let me take you back to the year 1991. We're going to Lawrence, Kansas, home to the University of Kansas and a building called Hoch Auditorium. Hoch Auditorium was built in 1927. In June of 1991, it was struck by lightning and caught fire. The building was a total loss. The high arched ceiling of the auditorium was built using a steel frame wrapped in limestone and other building materials, mainly wood. When the building caught fire and the wood began to burn, other materials in the building ignited as well. Photographs of the auditorium after the fire was extinguished show the steel arches that once supported the ceiling bent over. The extreme heat of a wood-fueled fire was enough to soften the steel arches and their weight was enough to cause them to bend and collapse. They still retained their original shape, but they were far from "melted". Fast forward to 2001. When the planes hit the Twin Towers, they ignited the flammable material contained therein, not just the jet fuel. You're talking carpets, drywall, furniture, wall paper, human bodies were all in there as fuel for the fires. You don't need 2300 degrees Fahrenheit to soften steel! The fires were not hot enough to "melt" the steel into a liquid form, but steel trusses holding up millions of tons of weight only need to soften a little to fail. And once they fail they cause potential energy to be released and the building begins a pancake effect, where the sudden shift of the weight on upper floors collapses onto lower floors. Then that potential energy is released and it begins to happen faster and faster as each floor fails and releases its potential energy. The collapse of the south tower was evidence enough that this was not an intentional demolition. If you watch the video, you see the upper floors tilt to the side briefly as the building begins to collapse. A controlled demolition would not have let that happen. As for WTC7, there was a fire in it as well and yes, there was much fuel in there as well. The only difference is that it didn't have an accelerant (jet fuel) sprayed all over it to burn faster. The fires burned unchecked all day, so of course it will be later before that building comes down. As for why the sprinkler system didn't extinguish the fire, I have no explanation. I can speculate that perhaps the water main into the WTC district was interrupted by the collapse of WTC 1 & 2??? The FEMA explanation of the pancake effect has been corroborated by many structural engineers and was demonstrated at the Murrah Building in 1995. ============================== The "secrecy" of WTC7 is not that big a secret. Former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani says in his book "Leadership" that WTC7 housed the New York central office of emergency management. It was a state of the art facility with every kind of emergence management tool available. So now, we have to add the entire New York City office of emergency management to the list of co-conspirators, along with Mayor Giuliani. This list just keeps getting longer and longer!!! =============================== This video fails to take into account that the designers of the Twin Towers actually built them with the thinking that they might be hit by a plane! However, according to the chief design engineer on the project, the thinking was something no larger than a 727 going at a much slower rate of speed. It was not uncommon for the upper floors of the towers to be shrouded in fog and because of the proximity of both JFK and LaGuardia Airports, they thought it might be a real possibility. Did you know that the Empire State Building was once hit by a B-25? =============================== I have neither the time nor the inclination to further refute this garbage. I did watch it so that I could comment intelligently on it, but as for believing it? Hardly. I suggest that everyone go out and actually read the 9/11 Commission report and then decide for themselves about what happened. It was a bi-partisan commission and no one in the United States government resisted its creation or its work. I fail to see how anyone can take the information in this video and believe for one minute that there is a "inside" conspiracy. The only conspiracy was the one formulated by Osama bin Laden.
 Report abuse

Log In To Vote   Score: 0
By Kay C on May 08, 2007 at 02:39 am
The administration itself resisted the 911 report creation, and when that failed, tried to appoint one of their own to head it -- it came to fruition only after a relentless fight from a group of wives of the slain firefighters.
 Report abuse

Add A Comment!

Click here to signup or login.

Rate This Article

Your vote matters to us