George Noory Sucks! - The Definitive Compendium

[Dateline]

You know what?  My heavenly father, God, or whatever inspires you, has a sense of humor.

He made Corsi, Norry, Falkie and Jimmy Church.

[expat]

By the way, Bob Zimmerman -- perhaps my fave C2C guest -- has a very strong statement on this topic, on his blog.

[Major Ed Damien]

In most of Europe and the UK, it is illegal to do so (depending on the country and how it is done.) There is not free speech in most of those countries and most of them have fairly aggressive so-called "hate crime" statutes. In a way I found it interesting that the French courts allowed the paper to do the anti-Muhammed thing at the same time investigating or sanctioning Dieudonné M’bala M’bala and various footballers for similar actions or speeches. I guess it depends what/who you are criticizing. Personally I think you should be able to say what you want, even if offensive, but, on the other hand, there is also nothing wrong with being polite or using common-sense when doing so. Just because "you have the right" doesn't mean you must always exercise it.
-GNS

George Orwell:  "I've written this manuscript I call 'Animal Farm'.  It makes fun of communists in a barnyard setting.  Stalin and Trotsky are actually pigs in it.  (Laughs)  It's the first book in which I have tried, with full consciousness of what I am doing, to fuse political purpose and artistic purpose into one whole.

"As I wrote in a letter to my French friend, Yvonne Davet, 'Animal Farm' is a satirical tale against Stalin ("un conte satirique contre Staline").  She liked the idea a lot.  Another friend said that in the right hands it could amount to a modern classic.  I don't know if I'd go precisely that far, but it's pretty damned funny.

"But, see, here is my problem:  Stalin really hates criticism.  I mean, really, really hates criticism.  For example, he sent that assassin to Mexico City to kill Trotsky for not keeping his fat mouth shut.  The assassin used a combination ice pick and hammer on Trotsky's head and put him into a death coma.  What do you think I should I do?"

Albrecht:  "Personally I think you should be able to say what you want, even if offensive, but, on the other hand, there is also nothing wrong with being polite or using common-sense when doing so. Just because 'you have the right' doesn't mean you must always exercise it."

George Orwell:  "Ah . . . why, you've certainly made a fabulous bloody point there, haven't you?  (Long pause, followed by crackling sounds.) OK, I just burned the manuscript to 'Animal Farm.'  The ashes, thankfully, are now a small blackened pile in my fireplace.  It truly was impolite of me to write it, let alone consider publishing it.  Please keep all this a secret between us.  What in bloody hell was I thinking? 

"Now I'm going to use my common sense and take up gardening instead of creating provocative books about communism which will only make the wrong people angry at me and likely provoke them into killing me.  Growing roses, gardenias, and lilacs will be a lot less dangerous and make more common sense for everyone in the long run.  Thanks for your support and good advice, my dear Albrecht.  I don't know what I'd do without you.  I'm going to make a polite pot of tea now like a good little gardener.  Cheerio." 

[albrecht]

George Orwell:  "I've written this manuscript I call 'Animal Farm'.  It makes fun of communists in a barnyard setting.  Stalin and Trotsky are actually pigs in it.  (Laughs)  It's the first book in which I have tried, with full consciousness of what I am doing, to fuse political purpose and artistic purpose into one whole."

As I wrote in a letter to my friend, Yvonne Davet, 'Animal Farm' is a satirical tale against Stalin ("un conte satirique contre Staline").  She liked the idea a lot.  Another friend said that in the right hands it could amount to a modern classic.  I don't know if I'd go precisely that far, but it's pretty damned funny.

But, see, here's my problem:  Stalin really hates criticism.  I mean, really, really hates criticism.  For example, he sent an assassin to Mexico City to kill Trotsky for not keeping his fat mouth shut.  The assassin used a combination ice pick and hammer on his head and put Trotsky into a death coma.  What do you think I should I do?

Albrecht:  "Personally I think you should be able to say what you want, even if offensive, but, on the other hand, there is also nothing wrong with being polite or using common-sense when doing so. Just because 'you have the right' doesn't mean you must always exercise it."

George Orwell:  "Ah . . . why, you've certainly made a fabulous bloody point there, haven't you?  (Long pause, followed by crackling sounds.) OK, I just burned the manuscript to 'Animal Farm.'  The ashes, thankfully, are now a small pile in my fireplace.  It truly was impolite of me to write it, let alone consider publishing it.  What in bloody hell was I thinking? 

Now I'm going to use my common sense and take up gardening instead of creating provocative books about communism which will only make the wrong people angry at me and likely provoke them into killing me.  Growing roses and lilacs will be a lot less dangerous and make more common sense for everyone in the long run.  Thanks for your support and good advice, my dear Albrecht.  I don't know what I'd do without you.  I'm going to make a polite pot of tea now like a good little gardener.  Cheerio."

What an absurd scenario! If anything it is those of a more leftist bent who are putting all these "hate speech" laws in action. As far as I'm concerned you should be able to parade in public wearing a swastiza, a burkha, and a klan drapes (even at the same time if so inclined.) Or even- shudder at the racism- wear a shirt with an American flag on it to a high-school with a large Hispanic, often illegal, student population. Now whether it is wise, or polite, to do so is another question. The point is there is common-sense, although I'm sure you know that. It is quite easy to post meme, or even cartoons, of Muhammed on the internet or even in a magazine. Now print up those up t-shirts and start walking down some Parisian suburbs or Rotterdam. Alone. And then get back to me about how wise a decision it was to do and how great the immigration policies have been. Of course you SHOULD be able to do so but the Muslim immigrants let in, and their descendents, don't have the same acceptance or tolerance that we have. Which is why they need to adapt or go home.
-GNS

[pyewacket]

I did get to listen to the segment and thank you all for directing me to a good source. I don't usually give George my full attention and was a little surprised by George's poor grammar, diction, his limited vocabulary, and lack of perspective on the subject. I know that I read about this everyday, here- I just haven't experienced it up close for a long time.

I can't say that I disagree with a few of you who posted about the need for civility, but you also need both sides to behave that way. I don't see this on the side of the extremists.

George and Corsi did talk in circles and repeated themselves throughout the segment. The anecdotes George threw in added zero to the conversation. That last caller was great! George was beside himself and proved that he cannot debate. I think he would be trounced by middle schoolers.

George did have his own style in the short debate with that caller:

[ItsOver]

I wish Noory had the common sense to keep his mouth shut.
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid than open it and remove all doubt."
Mark Twain

[NoMoreNoory]

In most of Europe and the UK, it is illegal to do so (depending on the country and how it is done.) There is not free speech in most of those countries and most of them have fairly aggressive so-called "hate crime" statutes. In a way I found it interesting that the French courts allowed the paper to do the anti-Muhammed thing at the same time investigating or sanctioning Dieudonné M’bala M’bala and various footballers for similar actions or speeches. I guess it depends what/who you are criticizing. Personally I think you should be able to say what you want, even if offensive, but, on the other hand, there is also nothing wrong with being polite or using common-sense when doing so. Just because "you have the right" doesn't mean you must always exercise it.
-GNS

No free speech in Europe and the UK? Is that really what you meant to say? Absolute nonsense, if so. I speak as a European Brit newly resident in the US. Yes, the UK has stringent laws governing public utterances designed to rouse hatred or violence towards any one group in society based on race, ethnicity, religion, etc. Good thing too. Under those laws, Charlie Hebdo would be entirely free to publish. Humour is not banned. Contrary to what Corsi kept saying, the magazine has published nothing malicious directed towards Muslims or Islam. Nothing, with respect, as strong as typifying Muslims in general as 'backwards'. The object of their satire is entirely Islamist terrorism.
Go back to the Danish cartoons which Charlie reprinted (as did UK publications). I recall the exasperated Allah standing on a cloud with a long line of still-smoking suicide bombers heading towards him. Allah exclaims 'Slow down! We're running out of virgins!' That's not offensive in any way. It's just funny.
So too, their recent cover depicting Mohammed addressing suicide bombers. '100 lashes if you don't die smiling.' Only funny, not offensive. Unless you're an unwilling suicide bomber, I guess. Except, as expat points out, that any depiction of the prophet is forbidden in Islam although it should also be pointed out that this is a recent ruling. That applies under Sharia law, not French national law which always supersedes it.
Their New Year cover, taking the traditional greeting from the President to the French people, wishing them peace, prosperity and good health and putting it in the mouth of the head of ISIS, was cleverly subversive, as all good comedy should be. Comedy is not, and never was, respectful.


As a footnote, look at that photograph of the terrorists about to execute the policeman lying injured on the pavement, arms raised, pleading for mercy. He is a Muslim, serving in the French police.

[Jorch Einstein]

Under those laws, Charlie Hebdo would be entirely free to publish. Humour is not banned. Contrary to what Corsi kept saying, the magazine has published nothing malicious directed towards Muslims or Islam. Nothing, with respect, as strong as typifying Muslims in general as 'backwards'. The object of their satire is entirely Islamist terrorism.

Exactly. Jorch and Corsi are so mind-numbingly stupid, they kept stating it was abusive and insensitive and basically equating it with hate-speech. Completely wrong. It's satire.
And Jorch kept going on and on about how he's respectful, and sensitive to others, and was brought up that way, and he would never do that type of thing, and blah blah blah. Yeah, he doesn't do satire. But he'll give airtime to nutcases who state Sandy Hook was a false flag, and insult the memory of all the kids that died there. And he won't open his stupid gob and state that the guest's views are ridiculous. My, how sensitive and respectful to all those kids that died.
Or he'll open his dangerously stupid gob and say things like an Iranian exchange student with a backpack, who happened to be near the Boston Bombing, is most likely the culprit. Even though there was no evidence yet, and the authorities had not made any connections between him and the bombings. But Jorch will get on the air and accuse an innocent person of a horrendous massacre, before all the facts are in. My, how sensitive and respectful.

[albrecht]

No free speech in Europe and the UK? Is that really what you meant to say? Absolute nonsense, if so. I speak as a European Brit newly resident in the US. Yes, the UK has stringent laws governing public utterances designed to rouse hatred or violence towards any one group in society based on race, ethnicity, religion, etc. Good thing too. Under those laws, Charlie Hebdo would be entirely free to publish. Humour is not banned. Contrary to what Corsi kept saying, the magazine has published nothing malicious directed towards Muslims or Islam. Nothing, with respect, as strong as typifying Muslims in general as 'backwards'. The object of their satire is entirely Islamist terrorism.
Go back to the Danish cartoons which Charlie reprinted (as did UK publications). I recall the exasperated Allah standing on a cloud with a long line of still-smoking suicide bombers heading towards him. Allah exclaims 'Slow down! We're running out of virgins!' That's not offensive in any way. It's just funny.
So too, their recent cover depicting Mohammed addressing suicide bombers. '100 lashes if you don't die smiling.' Only funny, not offensive. Unless you're an unwilling suicide bomber, I guess. Except, as expat points out, that any depiction of the prophet is forbidden in Islam although it should also be pointed out that this is a recent ruling. That applies under Sharia law, not French national law which always supersedes it.
Their New Year cover, taking the traditional greeting from the President to the French people, wishing them peace, prosperity and good health and putting it in the mouth of the head of ISIS, was cleverly subversive, as all good comedy should be. Comedy is not, and never was, respectful.


As a footnote, look at that photograph of the terrorists about to execute the policeman lying injured on the pavement, arms raised, pleading for mercy. He is a Muslim, serving in the French police.

Yeah. That last bit about the cop is pretty damned sad to see. I think the 'famine song' is funny satire but not allowed to sing it  Old Firm matches? (Hilariously sung to the Beach Boys song.) Swastizas are banned as is buyung historical items from the period on France, Germany, etc. (Ebay even banned for a time due to their laws.) Skrewdriver albums banned in Germany. (Bad music but I also dont like vile rap but dont say ban it either.) Football players sanctioned for giving a certain 'salute' even though it is not a 'roman salute' but a geature popularized by that French comedian banned entry into the UK (despite Schengen and EU travel rules.) UK just banned "spanking" porn even! I understand that Europe/UK has a much diff standard of freedoms (UK even eliminated double-jeopardy protections recently.) But speech, and even writings, are criminalized (that odorous holocaust denial author whose name escapes me now.)
-GNS

[RJ]

Did anyone else here George proclaim “people just don’t listen” last night?  One hell of a projection statement there Mr. Noory!

George kept on and on pretty much blaming the victims of the massacre in France.  That speaks loudly of Noory’s go along to get along attitude.  If his was the general thought in the world the USA would still be a colony of England, slavery would still be present, women would not be allowed to vote, the war in Vietnamn would still be raging on, etc, etc.  "It’s better to die on your feet than live on your knees”,  sadly that’s what seemed to have happen in France.  Satire should never be a death sentence!


One more point on the go along to get along.  If Noory had stronger convections he would not allowed C2C to have been destroyed by all the commercial brakes.  I’m so old I remember when Art would ask a question of a guest and the guest would respond with “that’s a long story”.  Art would sit back (could hear his chair squeak as he reclined) and respond, “this is radio, we have lots of time.  Please proceed with your long story".   Noory has allowed management to steam roll anything they want without a fight.  Go along to get along is not always the best policy.  [/size]


Coast to Toast

[NoMoreNoory]

Yeah. That last bit about the cop is pretty damned sad to see. I think the 'famine song' is funny satire but not allowed to sing it  Old Firm matches? (Hilariously sung to the Beach Boys song.) Swastizas are banned as is buyung historical items from the period on France, Germany, etc. (Ebay even banned for a time due to their laws.) Skrewdriver albums banned in Germany. (Bad music but I also dont like vile rap but dont say ban it either.) Football players sanctioned for giving a certain 'salute' even though it is not a 'roman salute' but a geature popularized by that French comedian banned entry into the UK (despite Schengen and EU travel rules.) UK just banned "spanking" porn even! I understand that Europe/UK has a much diff standard of freedoms (UK even eliminated double-jeopardy protections recently.) But speech, and even writings, are criminalized (that odorous holocaust denial author whose name escapes me now.)
-GNS

David Irving. His writings - or his right to write them - were never criminalized. He sued American historian Deborah Lipstadt for citing his work as that of a holocaust denier. It rebounded on Irving when the court found in Lipstadt's favour and branded Irving a racist, an anti-Semite and a denier. His case was not helped when he was covertly filmed giving the Nazi salute and shouting 'Sieg Heil!' at a neo-Nazi rally. The prison sentence was imposed in Austria as the result of a couple of inflammatory speeches he made there. You can bet your bottom euro they're juuuust a tad sensitive to these things in Austria.

[ItsOver]

... Art would ask a question of a guest and the guest would respond with “that’s a long story”.  Art would sit back (could hear his chair squeak as he reclined) and respond, “this is radio, we have lots of time.  Please proceed with your long story"...

I think I just I had an erection.

[3OctaveFart]

Yeah, that is fantastic. I can hear Art saying that.

[136 or 142]

No free speech in Europe and the UK? Is that really what you meant to say? Absolute nonsense, if so. I speak as a European Brit newly resident in the US.

I know nothing about the rest of Europe but I am aware that in the U.K addition to hate crime laws, and some very vague laws banning speech against religious groups, The U.K also has some laws outlawing the mockery of Parliament (some Jon Stewart program wasn't allowed to be aired in the U.K.  I have to say I find this a little surprising given that the show "Spitting Image" used to routinely mock parliament) and some noxious laws banning pornography.


Personally I don't hire governments to make moral decisions on my behalf.

[136 or 142]

Regarding last night's guest calling the Southern Poverty Law Centre a 'hate group'.  Actually the group is one of the leading anti hate groups around.
While I doubt there are any antisemitic sentiments in the documentary, the film's executive producer Robert Sungenis has been found on the internet to have made a number of rather vile antisemitic comments.  Whether that is enough for the SPLC to protest the film can, I suppose, be debated.[/font][/size]

[ItsOver]

Yeah, that is fantastic. I can hear Art saying that.

"My motto is: more good times. "
Jack Nicholson

[NoMoreNoory]

I know nothing about the rest of Europe but I am aware that in the U.K addition to hate crime laws, and some very vague laws banning speech against religious groups, The U.K also has some laws outlawing the mockery of Parliament (some Jon Stewart program wasn't allowed to be aired in the U.K.  I have to say I find this a little surprising given that the show "Spitting Image" used to routinely mock parliament) and some noxious laws banning pornography.


Personally I don't hire governments to make moral decisions on my behalf.

I guess we all have our quirks
I'm still coming to terms with not being able to buy a bottle of wine outside state-prescribed hours in Pennsylvania! The flag stuff affords me great amusement: not being allowed to touch the ground, can't be left on the pole, I mean staff, during the hours of darkness unless it's floodlit, etc. And don't get me started on the Pledge Of Allegiance, which used, by the by, to be accompanied by something remarkably close to the Nazi salute.

[Jorch Einstein]

Great show last night on "Challenging the Copernican Principle." I'm currently writing a book titled "Challenging the Round Earth Theory" in which I demonstrate, through numerology, hyper-dimensional torsion field physics, and ancient Sumerian black magic grimoires found in the Akashic record, that the Earth is indeed flat, not round. I propose to solve all waste and overpopulation problems by shoving all the trash and excess people over the edge. I propose that Jorch be the first person pushed off the edge of the flat earth. I will be contacting Tommy, hoping to use Coast as a forum to expound my theories to the public, when my book is published.

[NoMoreNoory]

I remember when Art would ask a question of a guest and the guest would respond with “that’s a long story”.  Art would sit back (could hear his chair squeak as he reclined) and respond, “this is radio, we have lots of time.  Please proceed with your long story". 

This is great

[ItsOver]

This is great

F'n great.  Oh, for those times.  May they be.  If for just one last time.

[Zetaspeak]

Regarding last night's guest calling the Southern Poverty Law Centre a 'hate group'.  Actually the group is one of the leading anti hate groups around.
While I doubt there are any antisemitic sentiments in the documentary, the film's executive producer Robert Sungenis has been found on the internet to have made a number of rather vile antisemitic comments.  Whether that is enough for the SPLC to protest the film can, I suppose, be debated.[/font][/size]

Thank you. Once again we get half the story on C2C with Noory but the full story here. You are right that is much more up to debate as to why SPLC protest the film, but at least give the honest reason why they are protesting. Unlike Noory and his dishonest guest who kind of gave a straw-man argument and made up the reason why SPLC had a problem with it and argued against that

As for the beginning of yesterday show. I could understand somebody having this opinion, I don't agree with it, but I understand if somebody has the opinion of "don't rock the boat" or "poke the bear" etc. Again I don't agree with it, but if somebody lives their lives like that, I could appreciate that point of view.

What I DON'T understand is how on earth can a host of C2C have that opinion. His entire profession consists of guests questioning mainstream/safe opinion. As J. Einstein & 142 said a few pages back, there are countless times that Noory had topics on that could be considered offensive. As mentioned his anti-science guest yesterday to people taking tragedies and making a conspiracy about it (Hell they even alluded a bit on yesterday story) I sure some religious people are upset when he talk about aliens. There are many times his shows fan the flames of an already intense situation with exaggerations expressed by  himself or his guests.

Not sure if there's any South Park fans here, but the Noory/Corsi reminds me of the episode of South Park titled "Cartoon Wars" Where the townspeople (Norry) were worried because "Family Guy" was going to show a drawing and their solution is to literally bury the entire head in the sand. Cartman (Corsi) who is a known as an awful person acted really "offended" by it and wants pull the "FG" episode off the air. But in reality he didn't really give a damn about the drawing but just hates FG so wanted to use this as excuse to pull the entire show. Which sounded so much like Corsi last night as he multiple times brought up Family guy disrespecting his values and it looks like he's only using this to push his own agenda.

[136 or 142]

One more point on the go along to get along.  If Noory had stronger convections he would not allowed C2C to have been destroyed by all the commercial brakes.  I’m so old I remember when Art would ask a question of a guest and the guest would respond with “that’s a long story”.  Art would sit back (could hear his chair squeak as he reclined) and respond, “this is radio, we have lots of time.  Please proceed with your long story".   Noory has allowed management to steam roll anything they want without a fight.  Go along to get along is not always the best policy. 

Again to defend Noory, I don't believe the number of commercials has changed in years.  Also, the only breaks are at the top and bottom of the hour.

[PB the Deplorable]

I... was a little surprised by George's poor grammar, diction, his limited vocabulary, and lack of perspective on the subject...

Wait, what?

[PB the Deplorable]

Regarding last night's guest calling the Southern Poverty Law Centre a 'hate group'.  Actually the group is one of the leading anti hate groups around...

We can discuss this further in the politics section, but this is the kind of thing he was likely referring to:

http://dailycaller.com/2014/03/26/fbi-severs-ties-with-liberal-domestic-terrorism-inspiring-southern-poverty-law-center/

[NoMoreNoory]

Again to defend Noory, I don't believe the number of commercials has changed in years.  Also, the only breaks are at the top and bottom of the hour.

I thought the steady increase in commercial time was one of Art's main gripes with PremRat. Judging by the length of his edited shows, I don't think Noory manages as much as 40 minutes air time per hour.

[Major Ed Damien]

What an absurd scenario!

Looks like you got me on that one.

[136 or 142]

I thought the steady increase in commercial time was one of Art's main gripes with PremRat. Judging by the length of his edited shows, I don't think Noory manages as much as 40 minutes air time per hour.

Including the bumper music, it is pretty much exactly 40 minutes per hour.  To which I say: count small blessings.

[136 or 142]

We can discuss this further in the politics section, but this is the kind of thing he was likely referring to:

http://dailycaller.com/2014/03/26/fbi-severs-ties-with-liberal-domestic-terrorism-inspiring-southern-poverty-law-center/

Blaming the SPLC for the actions of that person, is pretty much the same as Noory blaming the French Magazine for the actions of the Muslim extremists. Also, I'm sure that person couldn't have found their addresses in any other place.

[Jorch Einstein]

Robert Sungenis, the executive producer of The Principle, was, at one time, a follower of the crackpot Harold Camping, who was predicting the end of the world a few years ago. More on the executive producer of The Principle, Robert Sungenis:
In 2002, he claimed it was a fact that no one had ever proven that 6 million Jews died during the Holocaust and that demographic statistics show no real difference in the number of Jews living before and after World War II. According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, he also "repeated a series of ancient anti-Semitic canards" and later wrote about the involvement of Jews and Israel in a Zionist Satanic conspiracy aimed at Satan ruling the world.[18][19] Sungenis has also claimed that Israel orchestrated the JFK assassination in retaliation for the president's opposition to Israeli nuclear weapons.[20]
In 2014, Sungenis funded the production of a film called The Principle, which features interviews with Lawrence Krauss, Michio Kaku, Max Tegmark, Julian Barbour, and George F. R. Ellis.[1][22][26][27] Krauss has since stated that he was featured in the film without permission and agrees with the scientific community that geocentrism has been thoroughly debunked. Krauss said of the film that if people ignore it, “Maybe then it will quickly disappear into the dustbin of history, where it belongs.”[28] Kate Mulgrew, who narrated the trailer, released a public statement on her Facebook page disavowing the film, saying that she does not subscribe to Sungenis' views on history or science and would not have gotten involved in the documentary had she known of his involvement in it. She stated that she was "a voice for hire, and a misinformed one, at that."[29][30] Several other scientists featured in the film came forward to say that they had been misled about its true agenda, and that they would never have taken part in it had they known its aim.[31] Co-producer Rick DeLano responded to these allegations, insisting that the documentary is an examination of the Copernican Principle and does not explicitly promote the geocentric point of view, adding that he is in possession of signed releases from Krauss and Mulgrew, neither being misled about the content of the documentary or its intention to "explore controversial aspects of cosmology, even highly controversial ideas and theories."[32] Sungenis and DeLano suspect that the criticisms and complaints against their movie are part of a coordinated campaign to keep people from concentrating on the evidence presented in it.[
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Sungenis

[pyewacket]

Wait, what?

I know- it was poorly stated.  I haven't listened closely to George for a long time. If I had Coast on it was just background noise. I was awake and really paid attention to this segment and was stunned by just how bad he sounded. I knew he was bad, but had forgotten what he really sounded like and this segment exposed what I had come to ignore. Maybe it's because he was so worked up about the topic.