Loose Change coming to my school! Question help? [Archive]

WildCat

7th September 2006, 11:56 AM

Abbyas

7th September 2006, 11:57 AM

Good luck, Sling, with whatever you decide to do.

And please, please tell us what happens.

chipmunk stew

7th September 2006, 12:00 PM

Couple questions which might be relevant:

What's the school?
Who's presenting it?
What's the venue?
Who's the audience?

First thing I'd suggest is: Round up a couple of allies. If you have trouble getting people to commit, show them 9/11 Deniers Speak:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7216643725166640147

Since it's Loose Change, you can narrow your preparation. Use Gravy's Guide and Zach's new website:
http://www.loosechangeguide.com/LooseChangeGuide.html
http://internetdetectives.biz/case/loose-change

LashL

7th September 2006, 12:01 PM

Hand out copies of the Loose Change Viewer Guide to go along with the loose change piece of tripe and ask the loose(withthetruth)ers to discuss each of the discrepancies noted.

http://www.loosechangeguide.com/

Also, play the 9/11 Deniers Speak video and the Screw Loose Change video, and provide links to http://www.debunking911.com http://www.911myths.com and http://internetdetectives.biz/case/loose-change

Pardalis

7th September 2006, 12:04 PM

You could ask them this:

If you believe in such a grand conspiracy, which implies that the government has the means and funds to pull such a thing off, why are you free to go about and spread that little video around? Shouldn't you be in a secret prison somewhere in the Balkans by now?

Or

If "they" were able to fool every scientist and engeneer around the world, how come a couple of nerds like you were able to unveil everything?

brodski

7th September 2006, 12:05 PM

There is also the viewers guide
http://www.loosechangeguide.com/LooseChangeGuide.html
I wouldn't mention JREF or Gravy/ Mark Roberts by name, it would probably quickly descent into paranoia and accusations of CIA/Mossad shills.
Who is showing this film? Is it actually Dylan Avery (or other people from "louder than words") or is it just some loose change fans? If so ask them about the copyright violation law suit. ;)

chipmunk stew

7th September 2006, 12:06 PM

Orb

7th September 2006, 12:13 PM

Let the air out of their tires while everyone is watching the movie?

Just asking questions...

chipmunk stew

7th September 2006, 12:17 PM

I also need help in designing key questions to ask during the session after the film.
Just realized this is the main thing you're asking for.

One off the top of my head:

RE: molten steel--
What type of explosives would provide the continuous heat source required to keep metal molten for weeks at a time? Wouldn't a conventional slow-burning fire explain it better?

Pardalis

7th September 2006, 12:19 PM

My favourite question is to ask them how they think "They" could rig the towers with explosives without anyone noticing it.

If they say "on weekends", anybody with a brain should start laughing.

Oliver

7th September 2006, 12:36 PM

If you're feeling really ambitious, you could burn copies of MarkyX's Screw Loose Change video to hand out.

At the very least, make up pamphlets touching on major issues, and list links good debunking websites and rebuttals.

Just spot a camera on the Louder than Words-Team
and nail them with aimed questions about the most
obvious debunking points.

Regards,
Oliver

Arkan_Wolfshade

7th September 2006, 12:50 PM

I vote for, "Tell us how exactly the government was able to hide all of this from the experts while leaving such a glaring trail for you Scooby gang wannabes?"

Brainster

7th September 2006, 01:03 PM

1. Hit them with the cellphones/Airfones issue. Every single call that they claim could not have been made from a cellphone was in fact made with an Airfone according to evidence released after the Moussaoui trial. If you've got a portable music/mp3 player, it might be useful to play Cee Cee Lyles phone call to her husband and ask them if they really think that was created by voice morphing technology. Warning: This may spark a riot.

2. Ask them what happened to the passengers on board the planes. 9-11 Deniers hate questions about the passengers and try very hard to duck these questions. Ask them how the bodies of the victims on board Flight 77 got to the Pentagon if it was hit by a missile.

3. Ask Dylan to explain his theory about what happened to Bernard Brown, Jr. Dylan claimed that Bernard Brown, Sr., intentionally sent his son off to die (See the 9-11 Deniers Speak movie).

4. Ask them why they give so much credence to firefighters' eyewitness accounts of explosions at the WTC, and zero credence to over 100 other eyewitness acounts of the plane crashing into the Pentagon.

ponderingturtle

7th September 2006, 01:09 PM

My favourite question is to ask them how they think "They" could rig the towers with explosives without anyone noticing it.

If they say "on weekends", anybody with a brain should start laughing.

It was Ninja's(tm), everyone knows Ninja's(tm) can do anything and remain unseen.

This message brought to you by Bobs Rent a Ninja, for all the evil overlords in need of hoards of ninja assasins, think of Bobs first!

T.A.M.

7th September 2006, 01:15 PM

Hey valiant ninja warriors,

Loose Change is coming to my school on 9/11 to show their "film." Being in mass communications, I want to do a story on this, and I need your help!

I will be reading the threads again this weekend, in preparation, but I also need help in designing key questions to ask during the session after the film. If I mention I'm a poster on JREF, will these local guys bristle? Should I keep it hush-hush?

If anyone can help me with these questions (and answers) I would certainly appreciate it! I'm at school right now, and have a limited time to talk at the mo, but I'll be home in a couple of hours.

I have to run, but feel free to post any advice you might have for me, and know you have my deep gratitude!

Sling

Sling:

In addition to Brainsters questions, I would add these:

1.How did WTC1&2 Collapse? They will answer with - Controlled Demolition.
2. If it takes a professional CD team 3-4 months to set up a proper CD, in a building that is only 30 Storeys, such as the Landmark Tower, How did "They" find the time to plant similar explosives etc.. in these buildings, both of which were over 100 Storeys? As mentioned, they will say, on weekends.
3. Why is it that the collapse of WTC1&2 look nothing like a Controlled Demolition? There is no string of repeated loud explosions with accompanying repeated flashes from every floor, as is the case in real controlled Demolition. As well, the collapse of WTC1&2 starts at the point of impact and works down, where as in every other CD in history, it has started from the bottom of the building. - they will answer, it was a specially designed CD.

Then make this...
Point: If it was a specially designed CD, than it would involve (i) Large amounts of explosives on EVERY FLOOR, so that no matter where the planes hit, they could start the collapse there, (ii) A remote control device, and someone nearby to use it, so that when the plane hit the tower, they could set off the explosives just on that floor.

That is a good start for WTC1&2...I'll come back with more...

TAM

T.A.M.

7th September 2006, 01:20 PM

There is a large section in LC on "Explosions". When they get to this, ask them this...

Q: What else can make noises that sound like explosions? Can an "Exploding" electrical transformer sound like and explosion, because the twin towers were full of them. Ask them what sound is made when you throw a can of hairspray intoa bonfire...an "Explosion" I wonder how many aeresol cans could be found in a human inhabited tower fo 110 storeys. Ask them if the janitorial staff or mechanical staff of the buildings would have had any flammable products in their storage rooms? what sound would these make if they came into contact with fire?

TAM

Oliver

7th September 2006, 01:39 PM

Hey valiant ninja warriors,

Loose Change is coming to my school on 9/11 to show their "film." Being in mass communications, I want to do a story on this, and I need your help! ...
Sling

Will you film that?

Bronze Dog

7th September 2006, 01:45 PM

It was Ninja's(tm), everyone knows Ninja's(tm) can do anything and remain unseen.

This message brought to you by Bobs Rent a Ninja, for all the evil overlords in need of hoards of ninja assasins, think of Bobs first!

Definitely ninjas. (http://rockstarramblings.blogspot.com/2006/03/stupid-god-tricks-1-god-is-ninja.html)

EvilBiker

7th September 2006, 01:51 PM

I have a request:

(I would like this topic stickied, please.)

I am starting to see this LC bull**** appear in my backyard, and I want an easy reference to some heart-stopping questions. Not only will it help slingblade and me, but others as well.

In the interests of clarity, could we possibly try to keep specifically on topic for this reason? I'm not knocking anybody, I just want to prevent chaff from obscuring the good stuff.

T.A.M.

7th September 2006, 01:58 PM

Pentagon Questions:

Q:Is it true, or not, that the researchers for Loose Change recently went to Washington, where they interviewed a number of people who CONFIRMED that a large Jet airliner was seen diving towards the pentagon a moment before the crash? They will answer - yes, but we believe that was a "Fly over" or "Fly by".
Laughter should occur at this embarrassing response.

Q: Given there are numerous pictures on the internet that depict a hole in the wall of the Pentagon some 80 feet accross on the first floor, and a 16 foot wide hole adjoined to that across on the second floor, why does Loose Change claim there is only a 16 foot hole in the Pentagon from the crash?

Q: What experts did Loose Change contact to dispute the more recent findings of the medical examiner and DNA analysis teams who confirmed the DNA of all the passengers on Flight 77?

TAM

Mercutio

7th September 2006, 02:04 PM

One fairly subtle question, for early in the Q&A (and one which I really want to know the answer to) would be: "What sorts of things are you willing to accept as evidence? Are there any sources whom you would believe if they disagreed with your conclusions?"

If they believe eyewitnesses, then why only a handful and not others? If they believe academics, why only a handful and not others? If they believe military, why only a handful and not others? If...etc. There is no group (that I am aware of) the majority of which supports their notions. They are forced, time and time again, to selectively choose, selectively quote, selectively interpret. The eyewitnesses are against them, the structural engineers are against them, the government are against them, the academics are against them, the demolition experts are against them, the pilots are against them, the families of survivors are against them...with the exception of the smallest handful of each group. Other than "because we pick the people who agree with us", what criteria will they accept in order to use a person's information or opinion?

T.A.M.

7th September 2006, 02:21 PM

Landing in Cleveland Question:

Q: Given the implications of your ending, where you bring us the revelation that the people from the planes were in fact brought to Cleveland, via flight 93 and exited the plane from there, has anyone representing Loose Change confirmed that this plane landed at Cleveland airport?

Q:Beyond the single radio news report, early in the chaos of that day, that said 2 planes landed there at that time, one of which you are saying was Flight 1989, the other 93, was there any other report or witness to confirm this? If no, isn't that kind of weak evidence. If yes, then who or what source confirmed it?

TAM

bjb

7th September 2006, 02:26 PM

On ad hominem method would be to discuss the popularity of anti-Zionists beliefs in the 9/11 truth community. It would also be good to point out their belief in a moon landing hoax and Holocaust conspiracy. Strictly speaking, this doesn't address the 9/11 conspiracy but the audience would be interested to know what else these people believe.

Another embarassment is the belief that the Popular Mechanics 9/11 Myths article was written by the FEMA director's cousin, Benjamin Chertoff. In truth, they share a last name but they are not related. Besides, there are a couple dozen people who contributed to that article. They're not all globalists, are they?

azazal

7th September 2006, 02:29 PM

Q: How much money has Dylan Avery made from the sales of his DVDs? Is he really "asking questions" or is he simply making profit at the victims’ expense?

T.A.M.

7th September 2006, 03:13 PM

General Question for them:

Q Thousands of people, the vast majority qualified Scientists and Engineers, worked at the 9/11 sites for NIST, FEMA, and the ASCE (American Society of Civil Engineers). The findings of these three groups all support the official story, so if that is the case, do you consider them to be liars?

TAM

slingblade

7th September 2006, 03:33 PM

Just popping in for a moment, on my way to an appointment, but I wanted to say thank you and to ask that you please keep them coming.

@Darat: I'm not a teacher, and likely won't ever be one; not after what I saw from the inside. :mad: At the moment, I'm seeking my second BA, this time in Mass Communications. The story I will write may appear in my campus newspaper; my school editor wanted me to write it up today for relase in tomorrow's city paper, but I only just found out today the film is coming here, so I haven't the time to prepare a story.

I attend Mesa State College. The film is to be shown on 9/11 in the Saccamano lecture hall. When asked, I annouced my story idea to my news writing class and learned one of my classmates is a friend of these guys (and a group called Red...something...I forget now) and she thinks the film depicts the truth and should come out. I told her I had been reading along with you guys for months now, and I seriously doubt the veracity of the film or the group. She said "it's really well done," and I responded that just because it's "well done" doesn't mean it tells the truth. That a favorite tactic of CTers is to mix just enough truth with the lies, and to use fallacious reasoning, so that it sounds like gospel to the under-informed.

This has not made me popular with her. (Here I go again.)

I will be putting some of what you've said here on a flyer, and will be directing questions to this forum IF that's all right? If it's not, stop me before I do something stupid. Please.

Must run, be back later--thanks again!

T.A.M.

7th September 2006, 03:36 PM

anything you can do to bring average people who are fencesitters here so they can get access to the "REAL" truth, do it...

TAM

Pardalis

7th September 2006, 03:53 PM

they will answer, it was a specially designed CD.

Then ask them if it was a "specially designed CD", then how can they say it looks like a controlled demolition in the first place?

Pardalis

7th September 2006, 03:54 PM

I have a request:

(I would like this topic stickied, please.)

Very good idea.

CurtC

7th September 2006, 03:58 PM

One ad hominem method would be to discuss the popularity of anti-Zionists beliefs in the 9/11 truth community.
That's a good idea. A great amount, if not a majority, of the news articles shown in Loose Change are captured from the American Free Press, a neo-nazi rag. Christopher Bollyn, quoted more than once in Loose Change, is directly associated with that rag. Ask why they can't find more reputable news sources to back up their claims.

Pardalis

7th September 2006, 04:04 PM

T.A.M.

7th September 2006, 04:06 PM

I am not sure it would do any good. These guys get their news and fanbase from a group that would shutter if you told them that all of mankind came from a black skinned ancestor that "walked out of Africa".

TAM

stateofgrace

7th September 2006, 04:28 PM

I believe there are 6 suspects in US custody, each one involved in 911 one way or the other, including the alleged mastermind.

Ask them if they think they should be released.
Ask them would they would agree to a campaign to get these people released, since they think it was somebody else.
Ask them whether it is actually pointless trying to build a case against these guys at all.

stateofgrace

LashL

7th September 2006, 04:34 PM

My favourite question is to ask them how they think "They" could rig the towers with explosives without anyone noticing it.

If they say "on weekends", anybody with a brain should start laughing.

Yes, and after the laughter dies down and the 911 Deniers start sputtering about the WTC towers being unpopulated on weekends, ask them for details, such as how many people actually work there on weekends? how do they know? are they even aware of the tenants in the towers and the nature of their work and which tenants typically work weekends and which do not? do they have any idea about how the electronic security works in the towers, are they unaware of the millions and millions of dollars spent on developing high tech security systems after the 1993 bombing? do they have any idea how difficult it would be to obtain unauthorized access to the towers to rig it with explosives?

Which will lead to asking them why they think Marvin Bush had anything to do with Securacom in September 2001 since he did not, and asking them whether they are unaware that Securacom's contract with the WTC had ended years earlier?

Some more suggestions:

Ask them how "they" physically managed to rig the towers with explosives even if they could get into the buildings "on weekends" in the first place. They will probably answer that it was done via the elevator shafts. If so, ask them how that could possibly be true since, according to their own video, the elevator shafts were "hermetically sealed" (aka air tight) - does that mean that the super secret explosives planting team were also equipped with oxygen tanks? And ask them for specifics - even if "they" could somehow get into elevators, how would that get them to the core columns? Are they unaware of the electronic locking mechanisms in the elevators that prevented the elevator cars from being opened in between floors? (which actually cost a lot of lives that day with so many people trapped in the elevators)

And ask them why they mock the victims so - e.g. why do they make fun of Mark Bingham and his mother, why do they make fun of the flight attendants "Oh my god, I see water and buildings", why do they insinuate that Mr. Brown sent his child to die on purpose?

And, following up on a point made upthread by others, ask them why they choose to believe the firefighters who mention "explosions" at the towers (even though they quote mine and even though "explosions" does not mean "explosives") but they disbelieve the firefighters who describe the raging fires and massive damage at WTC7? Why do they ignore the overwhelming evidence that FDNY knew that WTC7 was going to collapse due to the damage and fires and cleared a collapse zone to prevent further deaths?

kevin

7th September 2006, 04:41 PM

New Zelanders (is that how you say it Gumboot?)

I think it's pronounced "Kiwis"

Darth Rotor

7th September 2006, 05:29 PM

Alareth

7th September 2006, 05:31 PM

I have an alternate idea: walk up to Dylan Avery and kick him squarely in the nuts. On behalf of the dead people he is slandering.

DR

While that might be enjoyable, it wouldn't actually be constructive. ;)

Darth Rotor

7th September 2006, 05:35 PM

While that might be enjoyable, it wouldn't actually be constructive. ;)

It would reduce noise pollution for a while, particularly if one promises to repeat the act every time he opens his mouth.

OK, some great ideas have downsides, like an assault charge.

Too damned bad.

DR

T.A.M.

7th September 2006, 05:51 PM

Yes, as much as I see your suggestion as a fantastic way to seperate the genetic chaff from the wheat, going to the slammer aint worth it...

TAM

Polaris

7th September 2006, 06:35 PM

While that might be enjoyable, it wouldn't actually be constructive. ;)

Unless it was hard enough to prevent breeding.

Brainache

7th September 2006, 06:45 PM

I'm still not clear on why the video is titled "Loose Change". I've heard a few guesses but I would like to know what the louder than words people say.

Dog Town

7th September 2006, 06:55 PM

It would reduce noise pollution for a while, particularly if one promises to repeat the act every time he opens his mouth.

OK, some great ideas have downsides, like an assault charge.

Too damned bad.

DR

I would love to be at 911 with you. Nailing one of these Cters would be like a strike in a bowling alley! Have a drink on me! I know the best bail bond folks.Don't have to use them, mind you. But, I feel ya!

slingblade

7th September 2006, 07:24 PM

And Slingblade, if they resort to accusing your Israeli heritage (I think I remember reading you say that, correct me if I'm wrong), tell them that Americans, Brittons, Canadians, Quebecers, Australians, New Zelanders (is that how you say it Gumboot?), Germans, French and many from other countries with very different backgrounds and ideologies are right behind you. :)

No, darlin', I'm Irish & German. But I'm glad you mentioned it, as if they started in on me about heritage, I'd have been confused by the non-sequitur and would have looked foolish or unprepared. (I just gotta learn to start thinking like that--what oddball thing might be asked, for which I should be prepared?)

slingblade

7th September 2006, 07:29 PM

It would reduce noise pollution for a while, particularly if one promises to repeat the act every time he opens his mouth.

OK, some great ideas have downsides, like an assault charge.

Too damned bad.

DR

While I applaud the idea in spirit, I think such an action might have a negative affect on my future in journalism. ;)

Besides, I've a tongue so sharp it can cut glass. Just load me up with sound, valid ammunition, and I promise to draw blood.

Peephole

7th September 2006, 07:35 PM

Wrong thread. Isn't there a delete post button anywhere?

Sword_Of_Truth

7th September 2006, 07:35 PM

And Slingblade, if they resort to accusing your Israeli heritage (I think I remember reading you say that, correct me if I'm wrong), tell them that Americans, Brittons, Canadians, Quebecers, Australians, New Zelanders (is that how you say it Gumboot?), Germans, French and many from other countries with very different backgrounds and ideologies are right behind you. :)

Pardalis, if you're going to list Canadians and Quebecers seperately, could you at least add The Republic of Alberta to that list? ;)

Class

7th September 2006, 08:21 PM

I'm still not clear on why the video is titled "Loose Change". I've heard a few guesses but I would like to know what the louder than words people say.

An article phrased it bestly with "It doesn't add up to much".

LashL

7th September 2006, 08:33 PM

An article phrased it bestly with "It doesn't add up to much".

Yes, that certainly fits.

I always thought the title was fitting because not only does it not add up to much but also because, in the case of that video, you have to sift through a lot of garbage to find anything of any redeeming value whatsoever.

StoneWT

7th September 2006, 08:59 PM

I second the mentioning of Mark Bingham. Ask the LCs to talk about Mark's call and give their opinion on it. Then I'd show the videos of Mark's mother explaining why her son gave his full name. It will show the LCs for the heartless bastards that they are.

Pardalis

7th September 2006, 09:06 PM

No, darlin', I'm Irish & German.

Ah, I remembered wrong. Maybe it's because your avatar reminded me of Jewish humour.

Anyways, you have my full support. :)

Pardalis

7th September 2006, 09:09 PM

Pardalis, if you're going to list Canadians and Quebecers seperately, could you at least add The Republic of Alberta to that list? ;)

Sorry about that, force of habit. :D

Foolmewunz

7th September 2006, 09:14 PM

1. I'm with the group here that's saying the best thing you could do for your fellow students is to expose their most outrageous and hurtful "beliefs". The slander of the victims, the accusation that someone cheerfully sent their child off to die, their links to anti-zionist trash rags, etc....

2. And has anyone got a figure for how many DVD's they've sold? Multiply it by a nice rough profit figure and ask Dylan by leaping to your own conclusion, say, "It's been calculated that you've already netted more than two hundred thousand dollars on this. Are you donating this to a charity, or keeping it?"
(This presupposes it's Dylan who's coming. If it's just his running dog lackies, rephrase it and embarass them for supporting a profiteering gun-runner!)

3. Ridicule! Ridicule! Ridicule! You're playing to a college audience, and it's the weapon of choice. If you have allies, perhaps you could arrange a Greek Chorus of laughers for every time they mention one of their more absurd ideas (Half of WTC 2 was closed down for a whole day, so they obviously had time to wire all of it and all of WTC 1 and WTC 7.... "Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha".)

4. Handouts/flyers. Any/all of the material already mentioned.

You're not going to win an argument against a Looser. Don't go in hoping to. Your goal should be to prevent them from picking up any more followers. I have faith in the young 'uns.... they should be able to see this crap for what it is if you give them the material. Oh, And did I mention, "ridicule"?

StoneWT

7th September 2006, 09:18 PM

Heck, I'd see about having a TV in the hall or outside the building playing 9/11 Deniers Speak. If you're allowed to, it would sink the ship before it launches from the port.

slingblade

7th September 2006, 09:48 PM

Heck, I'd see about having a TV in the hall or outside the building playing 9/11 Deniers Speak. If you're allowed to, it would sink the ship before it launches from the port.

I would love to do something like that, believe me.

My OP was rushed--I was in class at the moment. So I wasn't very clear; mea culpa.

I'll be attending as a journalist only. I need to ask journalistic questions about the film. I also need the answers (the correct answers, ;)) to those questions, so they don't catch me with my own pants around my ankles.

I'm downloading the film now, to watch in advance of the event. I'm reading the links given to the guide (I can't really afford to print copies of such a huge document, though. :(), and doing as much advance research as possible.

I've got the small flyer they put out this week--I don't think Korey and The Gang will actually be here, but I could be wrong. But this is a pretty podunk venue to be at on 9/11 itself, so I doubt they'll be here.
It's a college audience, mostly 20-somethings, and I guarantee most of them will be highly impressionable. This is an ultra-conservative area, very GOP, very right-wing, so the youth tend to lash out against anything "Bush," and will enjoy this film mostly because it makes W. look bad. Never mind the truth about anything.

Mind you, I'm not a big fan of Shrubbery, either, and am ready to blame him for anything in which he is actually at fault. I agree that our government might have known things in advance it should have acted on, things it should have told us, maybe. But I don't think there were any explosives in the WTC. I think the planes were quite enough to cause what happened.

So, I need good, solid journalistic questions to ask these guys. I'm sure I can come up with some of my own while watching the film, but I know you guys have been working so hard on this for so long. You know what I should be asking, better than I do.

I'll be working on this all weekend. Feel free to add to this thread, or to PM me.

I will post the story I write to this thread. Don't expect it to be very good--I've never written a news story before in my life. What a way to start, eh?

THANKS!

CurtC

7th September 2006, 10:43 PM

Brainster

8th September 2006, 12:37 AM

Another piece of advice I would offer: don't let them change the subject. The "Kent Hovind" technique is to spout off ten different lies if caught in one. Before moving on, get an acknowledgement that he is giving up on his other position/statement.

My favorite piece of transcribing came when I did this bit (http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2006/07/partial-transcript-of-fetzer-on-colmes.html) a few months ago, as Jim Fetzer tries to dance around the passengers question:

Colmes: Well, planes did hit the building, right?

Fetzer: Yeah, of course!

Colmes: Who was in them?

Fetzer: Well, that’s a very interesting question, who was in them. We can explain a lot, without being able to explain everything. My opinion, about those planes, is that they were probably military versions that were refueling tankers of 767s so they carry more fuel.

Colmes: You mean they weren’t the real planes that took off from JFK (sic)? Or Logan Airport?

Fetzer: The real planes from JFK (sic) are something of a mystery, Alan. Let me tell you something, just a couple of things about them, okay? By Federal Law, the National Transportation Safety Board is obligated to conduct an investigation of any crash of a commercial airliner, in this case, there were allegedly four, the NTSB has investigated none of them. Zero.

(9:00)

Colmes: But we know there were actual passengers on those planes who died.

Fetzer: Alan, what do you know about it? You weren’t there, you have no idea about those planes.

Colmes: Are you saying there were not passengers on those planes?

Fetzer: None of those hijackers were named on any passenger manifest. None of them was the subject of any autopsy. Five, six or seven have turned up alive and well, living in the Middle East.

Colmes: Now you’re talking about the hijackers, but the passengers there were actual passengers on those planes, right?

Fetzer: Well, there were passengers somewhere, but whether there were actual passengers on the planes as they were impacting the building is an interesting question. Everything was pulverized, Alan. All the concrete on the office floors was pulverized, all the office furniture was pulverized,

Colmes: No, but there are passenger records of people on those flights.

Fetzer: And they don’t include any hijackers, Alan.

Colmes: But they were real airplanes with real passengers on them.

Fetzer: Yeah there were real airplanes, but let me tell you something, if you look at the NTSB’s raw data, for these aircraft, which I observed on a spreadsheet this weekend, Dylan Avery who made Loose Change showed me the spreadsheet. You go for those four planes and you cross on the data and it’s all blank—it’s all blank Alan. Now, the NTSB had a formal obligation to investigate those crashes and it hasn’t done so. Why do you think it hasn’t done so, Alan?

Colmes: I don’t know the answer to that question, but what I’m trying to—my job is to ask the questions, you’re going to answer them—but my point is that there were civilians, Americans who were on those flights, right?

Fetzer: Well, there were some, but the whole business about how many were paid and that whole sort of thing or compensation—

Colmes: What do you mean, paid?

Fetzer: Alan it’s very spotty.

Faced with the repeated question about the passengers, Fetzer changes the topic to:

1. Type of airplane.
2. How does Colmes know there were passengers?
3. Let's talk about the hijackers.
4. Did I mention the floors were pulverized?
5. Let's talk some more about the hijackers.
6. Maybe the passengers were paid.

Now that is some dancing! Dylan & Co aren't sophisticated enough to do that, but they will clearly try some diversion like "The people are really secondary." Or the equivalent. This would be a perfect time to drill down deeper by bringing up Dylan's interview with WingTV with a question like:

Dylan claimed in an interview with Wing TV that Bernard Brown Sr had sent his son off to die, and quite specifically was quoted saying "Well, we know what happened to Bernard Brown, Jr." Okay, Dylan, what happened? Does he have a good explanation for why the boy's body was among those identified at the Pentagon that day?

chipmunk stew

8th September 2006, 05:20 AM

I've a tongue so sharp it can cut glass. Just load me up with sound, valid ammunition, and I promise to draw blood.
If that's the case, please please PLEASE get someone to take video.

Matthew Best

8th September 2006, 05:33 AM

I believe there are 6 suspects in US custody, each one involved in 911 one way or the other, including the alleged mastermind.

Ask them if they think they should be released.
Ask them would they would agree to a campaign to get these people released, since they think it was somebody else.

I have never thought of this before and it seems like a particularly pointed question to ask, especially in front of an audience.

TobiasTheViking

8th September 2006, 05:44 AM

do it. DOOO IT. and record it for us.

gumboot

8th September 2006, 07:12 AM

It was Ninja's(tm), everyone knows Ninja's(tm) can do anything and remain unseen.

But Ninjas(tm) would never carry out such an operation. It is not awesome enough for a Ninja(tm). Nor is it part of the Ninja(tm) base facts:

Facts:
1. Ninjas are mammals.
2. Ninjas fight ALL the time.
3. The purpose of the ninja is to flip out and kill people.
source (http://www.realultimatepower.net/index4.htm)

A Ninja(tm) would have flipped out and cut the head off the WTC.

-Andrew

Darth Rotor

8th September 2006, 07:20 AM

While I applaud the idea in spirit, I think such an action might have a negative affect on my future in journalism. ;)

Besides, I've a tongue so sharp it can cut glass. Just load me up with sound, valid ammunition, and I promise to draw blood.

Ask him why he slanders Captain Burlingame, whose retirement from the Naval Resreve in 1996 was 4 years before the alleged 2000 Mass Casualty Drill held at the Pentagon to train and assess firefighting, emergency response, and command and control procedures, as well as coordination with civil emergency authorities. Given the Pentagon's proximity to the Reagan Airport, and the 1982 crash by Air Florida into the 14th street bridge, and the crash near La Guardia about 5 years ago in to Queens, not exercising that sort of disaster response would be irresponisible.

Ask Korey why he finds it appropriate, as a war vet, to slander a Navy Fighter Pilot? Fighter pilots (Navy and Air Force) flew close air support missions all over Iraq and Afghanistan (and still do every day) for people like him. What the hell is his problem? Point out that before Korey Rowe was born, before he learned how to masturbate, before he learned how to lie and slander, Captain Burlingame was hanging it out on a daily basis, bringing a screaming jet aboard a postage stamp in the dead waste and middle of the night.

Hell, ask that young man if another disgruntled war vet, Tim McVeigh, is his hero? McVeigh was also into government conspiracy theories.

Sorry, I'm losing my cool.

Best of luck, give 'em hell.

DR

gumboot

8th September 2006, 07:35 AM

New Zelanders (is that how you say it Gumboot?)

I think it's pronounced "Kiwis"

Either is fine. :)

"New Zealander" is the internationally correct, "Kiwi" is for those "in the know" :D

To Slingblade... I can only repeat the good advice many have given. Do not let them change the subject. Once a single point has been made jump on it (let's face it, whatever their first point is, it will be wrong). Don't give them an inch, don't let them deviate. Keep em on that point until they admit it is false.

-Andrew

Brainster

8th September 2006, 09:41 AM

I've got the small flyer they put out this week--I don't think Korey and The Gang will actually be here, but I could be wrong. But this is a pretty podunk venue to be at on 9/11 itself, so I doubt they'll be here.

Yes, I doubt very much they will be there, so many of the questions we've been coming up with may not be useful. I'm going to think on this on the way to the office and see if I can come up with something.

slingblade

8th September 2006, 10:41 AM

Thanks, Brainster. I'm having a hard time downloading the entire film. My broadband connection keeps cutting out on me.

My stepson, also a student, is thinking of making small flyers, maybe saying something about "for more information, and to read opposing viewpoints, visit (the JREF forum, or the Guide site, etc.) at...." etc. He would hand them out, or put them on a table near the lecture hall.

I plan to ask about the "Fireman's bomb" quote, and the correction, and ask them to explain the discrepancy. That's one.

I plan to create a question or two about the light poles at the Pentagon, and maybe something about the debris.

Questions about the passengers (and supposed lack of passengers) and their current whereabouts.

Question about the profits made from this film, and to whom those profits are going. Question about the ethics of profiting from the deaths of thousands.

What else?

Pardalis

8th September 2006, 10:52 AM

Questions about the passengers (and supposed lack of passengers) and their current whereabouts.

About that, we hear often Avery say in response "I wish I knew", or something like that. He insinuates by this of course that the passengers were brought to some undisclosed place and were there executed.

In response to this nonsense, you could ask: "So why didn't the conspirators just leave them in the planes to begin with, where they would have died anyways?"

Arus808

8th September 2006, 11:07 AM

Thank heavens, that we have some really rational people who live in my home state. Majority of them do not believe Dylan Avery's version of 9/11. There are some skeptics, and liberal hating people, but they know that Loose change is far from being factually correct.

As for what kinds of questions, many have brought up good ones, but remember, just to keep it calm. Do not show that you are "agravated" by their answers. Repeat the questions until they give you one and if they dont, then pointedly comment to them "So you dont know" or "So you dont have evidence of what you claim".
Anything to put them on the spot.

DavidJames

8th September 2006, 11:24 AM

I've never debated with a "troother", but I have had many public "discussions" with people who use techniques like theirs in debates.
One of my favorite things to do is to ask a pointed yes or no question. Inevitably their answer rambles on for minutes. At the end I'll ask in a genuinely inquisitive tone, I'm sorry, was that a yes or a no. That usually gets a laugh and not so subtly points out their obvious attempt at avoiding the question.

Hellbound

8th September 2006, 11:27 AM

DavidJames is on the right track, along with many others. Don't ask questions that require long, drawn-out explanations (except as set-up). ASk specific questions that should be limited to yes and no answers, and press for an answer. You might ask something general to get started (i.e.-if a plane didn't hit the Pentagon, what did?") and then step in to get the yes-and-no answers as they go into the conspiracy spiel.

In any case, reduce wiggle room and stay on target. When they start rambling, it means you have them in a corner, don't change direction or they'll slip past.

Arus808

8th September 2006, 11:29 AM

Anything to show that they dont really understand what they are saying is a way to show them for the inept researchers they are.

Spins

8th September 2006, 11:29 AM

I'm still not clear on why the video is titled "Loose Change". I've heard a few guesses but I would like to know what the louder than words people say.
From what I heard it’s a reference to the amount of money gained from 9/11 (in their opinion of course), i.e. the WTC insurance and the gold vault!

Arkan_Wolfshade

8th September 2006, 11:51 AM

T.A.M.

8th September 2006, 12:11 PM

I agree with those who have said...

DO NOT LET THEM DEVIATE FROM ANSWERING YOUR QUESTION. DO NOT LET THEM CHANGE THE TOPIC. REEL THEM BACK IN EVERYTIME THEY TRY!!

This is key, as eventually you will get them to either (1) Be firm on something, which can then be used in the future, or (2) make them look like stupid waffling idiots. You see, it is a win win situation if you keep them ON TOPIC!!

TAM

Dark Jaguar

8th September 2006, 04:37 PM

Do the Maddox interpretation of it at some point.

http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=911_morons

Ask why the main man behind it all is still breathing.

Brainster

8th September 2006, 05:02 PM

Okay, trying to revise my thoughts here on the questions that would make sense as a reporter, trying to cover this screening as a news story, and assuming that Dylan & Co won't be here, but that some 9-11 Denier will be fielding questions.

1. The film makes a key point about the phone calls being apparently impossible, on a cellphone while at cruising altitude. Calls from Mark Bingham, Betty Ong, Todd Beamer and others are specifically denied in the movie on this basis. But the government's evidence in the Moussaoui trial makes it clear that all these calls were made with Airfones, which absolutely do work at cruising altitude. Doesn't this fact undermine many of the claims of the film?

2. Does anybody really believe that the Airfone calls were faked using voice-morphing technology? Mark Bingham, for example, talked to three different people at his aunt's house on that morning. How would an actor or a computer operator been able to fake that? Cee Cee Lyles left a voice mail for her husband; is it really credible that he would not have realized it wasn't her?

3. The film uses carefully selected quotes from Shanksville coroner Wally Miller to create the impression that there was no plane and there were no bodies in Shanksville. For example, Miller is quoted as saying, ""I stopped being coroner after about 20 minutes, because there were no bodies there." That quote comes from a Washington Post article, but listen to what Miller followed that up with, which didn't make it into Loose Change: "It became like a giant funeral service." The article goes on to say, 'As a funeral director, Miller says, he is honored and humbled to preside over what has become essentially an immense cemetery stretching far into the scenic wooded mountain ridge. He considers it the final resting place of 40 national heroes.' Is it fair or honest of the film to present a quote that completely misrepresents Miller?

T.A.M.

8th September 2006, 05:22 PM

Just to add, without confusing Brainsters well designed questions:

1. There was one call, made by cell phone, from that latreen, but we calculated that call, based on the data from the flight recorder, to have occured at 5500 feet, not 32,000 to 35,000 as they contend.

2. Also, there was a call made by a woman who proceeded to give the combination to her safe to the woman on the other line (Brainster, can you provide the names, I have forgotten). Now if the voices were faked, whether via prerecordings or live "mimicing" how would the forgers know the combination to the safe. Only the real person in question would know this.

TAM

Arkan_Wolfshade

8th September 2006, 05:28 PM

ooh, I've got one, "How much is al Qaeda paying you to deflect attention from their organization?"

slingblade

10th September 2006, 02:50 PM

I have created a list of basic questions which I will be sending soon to the leader of the local group presenting the film tomorrow.

After he has had a chance to respond to my email, I will post these questions, as I think them pertinent enough for anyone else finding themselves in this situation. They are not necessarily confrontational, and do not, so far, address the contents of the film specifically.

If he does not reply to my email, I will not post the questions here until after the showing tomorrow, so that I can have a chance to ask them without his being able to prepare.

Soon....

shuize

10th September 2006, 10:19 PM

I agree with the Maddox related post above.

Ask them why they believe a government that is supposedly able to pull off an incredibly complicated operation to kill thousands of citizens -- including attacking its own military personnel -- without a hitch would hesitate for a second to knock off a couple of college kids who threatened to expose the "truth" of their evil deeds?

Personally, I really cannot fathom how any rational person can ponder that question for more than a minute and fail to conclude the whole Loose Change CT is bullsh*t.

Dog Town

10th September 2006, 10:29 PM

In my opinion, I cannot see how any rational person could ponder that question for more than a minute and fail to conclude the whole Loose Change CT is bullsh*t.

A-men from the choir!

slingblade

10th September 2006, 11:44 PM

I did think about asking why people simply wearing anti-Bush t-shirts, standing quietly, not bothering anyone, are removed from Bush rallies...but these guys openly declare the government killed its own citizens, and no one bats an eye at them....

Mince

10th September 2006, 11:53 PM

Is this college or high school ( I know you're a teacher, not sure where though)?

You know (s)he's a teacher? How so? If (s)he's a teacher, I would like to think (s)he wouldn't have to ask the question in the OP.

slingblade

11th September 2006, 01:06 AM

I was studying for my license, and I've talked about it often in the last year. Now I'm in mass communications.

Why shouldn't I need to ask the question? Or more correctly, why shouldn't I ask for help framing specific questions?

And it's "she."

slingblade

11th September 2006, 11:45 AM

The group showing the film tonight is called "The Red Pill," the name being taken from the Matrix. Any info on them would be helpful, too. I'm checking them out via search engine.

chipmunk stew

11th September 2006, 12:03 PM

The group showing the film tonight is called "The Red Pill," the name being taken from the Matrix. Any info on them would be helpful, too. I'm checking them out via search engine.
Probably this 'zine group:
http://colorado.indymedia.org/newswire/display/14687/index.php
http://colorado.indymedia.org/usermedia/application/10/04_14screen.pdf
http://www.myspace.com/gjam_theredpill

chipmunk stew

11th September 2006, 12:12 PM

Probably this 'zine group:
http://colorado.indymedia.org/newswire/display/14687/index.php
http://colorado.indymedia.org/usermedia/application/10/04_14screen.pdf

http://www.myspace.com/gjam_theredpill

Also being screened by The Red Pill:
http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/51224505a6ef3b7e8.bmp (http://forums.randi.org/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=1430)

c0rbin

11th September 2006, 12:31 PM

Also being screened by The Red Pill:
http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/51224505a6ef3b7e8.bmp (http://forums.randi.org/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=1430)

That Fidel Picture is freaking me out!

slingblade

11th September 2006, 01:20 PM

Thanks for those links; I had not found all of them yet and appreciate the help.

I'm all for people searching for (and even finding) truth. But we all know truth comes in as many shapes and sizes as breakfast cereal, and one has to be specific and discerning in one's search. Sometimes, truth lies, depending on how you approach it and exactly what you ask it.

So, anyway, below are the questions I have asked of The Red Pill. Largely non-confrontational, asking for information or opinion. What do any of you think?

Questions:
1. Tell me something about your group, please. What is the purpose of The Red Pill; is this group connected to the makers of Loose Change, and if so, in what way(s)?

2. Who made the decision to show Loose Change at Mesa, and why?

3. What is your intent in showing this film now, on the fifth anniversary of these events?

4. What do you hope happens as a result of showing this film?

5. Is the showing meant to spark a dialogue, and if so, of what nature and between whom?

6. Do you have any long-term plans for discussing this issue on campus after the showing? If so, what sort of activities related to the film and its premises will you be engaging in on campus after the showing? Will you hold discussion groups, or present your views in the Criterion or other campus media?

7. Will you present a "call to action" after, or as a result of, showing this film?

8. If so, what will you ask students to do in response to the information given in this film?

9. Are you aware of the numerous books, videos, and web sites which debunk the Loose Change film?

10. Have you read any of this material? Why or why not?

11. If yes, which sources, specifically, have you read?

12. If yes, did any of these sources affect or change your opinion of Loose Change? If yes, why and in what way? If no, why not?

13. Are you familiar with WingTV (World Independent News Group)? If so, what is its mission or its purpose, and who is associated with it? Have you visited the site, and do you consider it a valid news source? Do you detect any bias, and if so, what is its nature, and toward what or whom is this bias directed?

14. Are you familiar with The American Free Press (AFP)? What is its mission or purpose, and who is associated with it? Have you visited the site, and do you consider it a valid news source? Do you detect any bias, and if so, what is its nature, and toward what or whom is this bias directed?

15. The following quote is taken from this website:

http://internetdetectives.biz/case/loose-change

"Loose Change, in all of its incarnations, contains a staggering amount of both logical and factual errors. Poor sources, ignorance, and misinterpretation of evidence is rampant. Dylan Avery wants to show people the truth behind September 11, yet in these videos he overlooks and neglects any variety of truth. Loose Change is flawed in almost every regard, and its producers should either cease distributing it or reclassify it as fiction."

How do you respond to this statement?

-------------

I have already e-mailed these to the right person, so I'm giving nothing away by posting them here. If I get responses, I will let you know.

slingblade

11th September 2006, 09:26 PM

Okay, I went. I spoke to them.

Believe it or not, they are not just nice guys, but also admit there are factual errors in Loose Change.

Unfortunately, and you will believe this, they think the fact that such "small, minor errors" exist in all editions of the film (and that the specific errors change in each edition) does not in any way hurt the film or the filmmakers' credibility.

These are basically good guys, who honestly think they're onto something.

This just made me more sad, not less.

The Randi million was brought up. It was cute. "If somebody could prove Loose Change wrong, they'd win that million bucks!"

Me: You mean the million James Randi offers? That million?

"Yeah! That guy! He's cool. But if this were all untrue, someone would sure be rich!"

Yeah.

More later--have class early tomorrow and I just got back. Must study.

Bell

11th September 2006, 09:32 PM

Don't you know? The errors are there intentional!! So we would feel pressed to do or own investigation into the 'lies' of 9/11.

shuize

12th September 2006, 04:20 AM

Don't you know? The errors are there intentional!! So we would feel pressed to do or own investigation into the 'lies' of 9/11.
They actually said that, didn't they?

As I posted above, to think that anyone takes these guys seriously boggles the mind.

I wonder if they've tried that approach in any of their college classes:

"Hey, um, Professor, you can't, like, mark me down for any mistakes in my paper 'cause, like, I only left those in to make sure you would read it carefully and stuff ... and, oh, yeah, even if I'm wrong, I'm just, like, asking questions, man."

Bukkake, meet Stupid.

Bell

12th September 2006, 06:07 AM

They actually said that, didn't they?

As I posted above, to think that anyone takes these guys seriously boggles the mind.

I wonder if they've tried that approach in any of their college classes:

"Hey, um, Professor, you can't, like, mark me down for any mistakes in my paper 'cause, like, I only left those in to make sure you would read it carefully and stuff ... and, oh, yeah, even if I'm wrong, I'm just, like, asking questions, man."

Bukkake, meet Stupid.

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=62262

slingblade

13th September 2006, 03:26 AM

They actually said that, didn't they?

I'm not sure; I have to listen to the recording I made. Haven't done that yet.

I asked if they had visited any debunking sites, and they responded with something like: "Pffft, those sites don't debunk it, they just trash it," but that's not a direct quote.

As I left, one of the members followed me out, to speak with me. I wanted to stay until the end, but couldn't for a couple of reasons. That bugs me a little. Anyway, this guy was very nice, respectful, articulate, sincere....it's too bad for him I had gone forwarned and forearmed, or I could easily have been swayed by him, at least somewhat. But I came away from it feeling he really does believe this, and isn't just gunning for a president he hates, grabbing any excuse to do so. Anyway, during our chat, he admitted some of the mistakes were pretty glaring; he specifically cited the 10 takeoffs and 13 landings, and admitted that was pretty dumb.

That's when I asked him if he didn't think it hurt the credibility, and he said not really, because they keep updating the film as they learn more, and are correcting mistakes. (Shouldn't you make sure you have it right the first time, before you release it?) He said in the next incarnation (The Third Edition!), the comment about Condi Rice calling Willie Brown would be removed, because that didn't happen, either.

I mean, I felt bad for this guy! If you could have been there, and heard him...he's at least got passion, misdirected as it may be. And I appreciated his honesty, as far as he allowed himself to go. But then he started to give me the "faster than freefall" argument and I said, "but doesn't that mean the surrounding debris was falling faster than faster-than-freefall?" So he cut to the plumes of smoke coming from the floors below while the building fell as indicative of explosions. I told him that could be explained as simply smoke pushed out of the windows by downward pressure created as the upper floors fell. "No, seriously, have you looked at it?" ("Several times.") "It's bombs, you can just tell." He mentioned the building being closed, the bombs being planted, and I asked him if he knew it takes months to set up such a thing in much smaller buildings, not mere days. "Not for government demo experts." :boggled:

Through all of this he was impassioned, but calm, trying for reasonable. I was at least impressed by his control.

He's the kind of guy I would like to bring here and to other sites, and show him what I've seen. I think he might change his mind about some things. I think he's capable of it. I still have questions, too. Lots of them. Yet my biggest problem with Loose Change is not that they think they smell a rat. It's that they go down the street and around the corner to look for the rat, ignoring the house entirely. They aren't asking the right questions, and they're making stuff up to fit the questions they are asking.

If I've learned anything in life, it's that people are capable of anything. I've questioned my government since Watergate. If it could be proven to me, I wouldn't have a problem with accepting it. But these guys aren't proving anything to me beyond that they don't know how to do what they think they're doing.

Yeah, it ticks me off, but it also makes me sad.

Hellbound

13th September 2006, 07:15 AM

I mean, I felt bad for this guy! If you could have been there, and heard him...he's at least got passion, misdirected as it may be. And I appreciated his honesty, as far as he allowed himself to go. But then he started to give me the "faster than freefall" argument and I said, "but doesn't that mean the surrounding debris was falling faster than faster-than-freefall?" So he cut to the plumes of smoke coming from the floors below while the building fell as indicative of explosions. I told him that could be explained as simply smoke pushed out of the windows by downward pressure created as the upper floors fell. "No, seriously, have you looked at it?" ("Several times.") "It's bombs, you can just tell." He mentioned the building being closed, the bombs being planted, and I asked him if he knew it takes months to set up such a thing in much smaller buildings, not mere days. "Not for government demo experts." :boggled:

Actually, he's probably right on that last point.

It'd take twice as long for government demo experts :D

I should know, working with engineers in the military (and with a brother in Special Forces) I've worked with our government demo experts.