The passion of the Twatsy.

Yes, I realize it's just indulging him, sort of like how you finally acknowledge the annoying six-year-old who's screaming, "Hey, Mom, look at me! Mom! Mom! Hey, Mom! Look at meeeeeeee!" But ... what the hell.

After being slapped upside the head numerous times for not knowing the difference between a triangle and an octagon (a skill acquired not only by pre-schoolers but various forms of livestock and experimental mice), Twatrick finally cops to being a retard:

Cynic also digs up the nonsense that swirled around the Montebello conference last year, in which it was insisted that undercover police officers were agents provocateurs.

Which, amazingly enough, Twatsy, you insufferable tool, turned out to be completely correct. Not-stupid people: 1; Twatrick: 0. But then the fun begins:

I'll be the first to admit that I made some comments based on poor-resolution photographs. However, what Cynic fails to mention is that the same post suggested that the photograph should be enhanced to ascertain what the marks on the bottom of the boots really were.

Upon enhancement, they turned out to be octagons. A mistake was made. Such is life.

Ahhh ... mistakes were made, based on some "poor-resolution photographs," which suggests, of course, that Twatsy was ever so cautious and qualified in his initial suggestions and accusations, yes? Whoops:

Don't drop out of clown college just yet, guys:

"Yellow Triangle indicates that it is a class 2 toe cap with puncture resistant sole.

And the defense rests.

But wait ... the careful, cautious qualification founded on "poor-resolution photographs" continues (emphasis added):

The presence of the yellow triangles on the boots of the protestors has led some individuals to conclude they were police officers.

Yet, upon any further investigation [sic], these individuals would have discovered that the yellow triangles are certification markings identifying the boots as a “class 2 toe cap with a puncture resistant sole”.

The argument that the yellow triangles on the boots identifies them as "police issue boots" falls pretty flat once one considers that these are very common boots, used by policemen and construction workers as well as miscreants who want to cause a good deal of damage at a political protest and not break their toes.

See, here's how it works, Twatsy. After you've come out swinging like that in favour of triangles and regular construction boots, and denigrated people who disagreed with you -- calling them "clowns" -- you don't have the right to then go back and blame it all on bad pics. It's way too late for that, subsequent retractions notwithstanding.

See, we here in not-batshit-crazy-land actually took the time to reserve judgment until we got some good photos. And blew them up. And inspected them carefully. And drew our conclusions based on those results.

You, Twatsy, on the other hand (and based on evidence you now openly admit was questionable at best), immediately went running off at the mouth, dismissing and insulting everyone who disagreed with you, and only sheepishly (and finally) recanted after you'd had your nose rubbed in your stupidity multiple times. Sorry, Twats ... you don't get that kind of out. After all that howling on your part, you don't get to blame it all on some initially poor-quality pics.

Oh, and here's the funniest part:

Upon enhancement, they turned out to be octagons. A mistake was made. Such is life.

Except, Twats, those "mistakes" always seem to be made by you. Never, ever, ever by me. Funny how that works, isn't it?

P.S. Hard to believe that anyone could write something this bone-headed:

The argument that the yellow triangles on the boots identifies them as "police issue boots" falls pretty flat once one considers that these are very common boots ...

But Twatsy, you dipshit, that's not the argument we were making. Our argument was that the symbols weren't triangles, but octagons, which is what led us to suggest that the instigators were police. I mean, holy Jesus, how much of an intellectual basket case does someone have to be to get an argument turned around 180 degrees like that, and make a claim that's exactly backwards?

AFTERSNARK: Yes, for God's sake, I realize how utterly unamusing it is beating up on the Twatrick. I will try to raise the intellectual level of the smackdowns around here. There's always Steve Janke ... no, wait ... Dr. Roy ... um, all right, Sandy Crux? Frank Hilliard? Kate McMillan? Adam Daifallah? JoJo? Kathy Shaidle? Brian Lemon? SUZANNE? MaryT? Neo Conservative? Denyse O'Leary? Wendy Sullivan?

Holy shit ... has it really come to this?

BONUS SNARK AT NO EXTRA CHARGE: It's entertaining to watch Twatrick play the "It was an honest mistake but I corrected it in a timely way" card. From the tail end of this piece, we read:

UPDATE - CTV news has corrected the "yellow triangles" claims to note that the markings on the boots (of the officers, at least) look more like yellow octagons, similar to the Vibram boots logo.

So ... after an entire article in which Twatrick the Unready reproduces photos which show just what kind of, well, twat he really is, and after he openly admits that CTV has come to the same conclusion, what is Twatsy's very next sentence?

This being said, the yellow markings on the bottom of the suspects' boots really do look more like triangles.

And from the very photo posted by Twatsy earlier in his very own post:

Yes, Twats ... triangles. Definitely triangles. Jesus, what a pathological fuckwit. Did I mention that Twatsy is a fuckwit? Yeah, he's a fuckwit.

And, yes, we're done here.