The Loose Change forum

[Oliver]

I think they went on a hunting spree today and eliminated all skeptics (again.)

The 12 page Gravy thread was also erased.

If they were members in here, i would sew them some
"I´m a dumb nazi and all i get is this lousy" -badge/s. :rolleyes:

[Minadin]

What was your last message over there?

This was, I believe:

Actually, yes. The reason that they look so different is because of where the damage was and how the structure failed. WTC 7 looks more like a conventional implosive demolition because of how it failed - it's much more similar to what we're familiar with when we see buildings purposely imploded on TV. The structure failed at the bottom where there was a major load transfer truss between the newer WTC7 structure and the sub-station it was built over. When the support there went, gravity pulled the rest of the building down, from the inside-out. Of course, there are differences: the debris field wasn't nearly as carefully placed as you would like in a demo; also there were no visible or audible explosions from cutting charges.

I say looks like a CD, because that's the only way to describe it in figurative language. We don't have any other similar thing to which to compare it. But it's still just a figure of speech - a comparison - in this case, a simile. It's not literal. For instance, if I was trying to describe a Boeing 757 to you, I might say that it looked like a DC-10. That doesn't mean that I think that it IS a DC-10, I'm just using comparative language that I hope you can relate to to describe it. And, to someone who isn't an expert at identifying different types of planes, that's a pretty valid comparison.

To someone who is an expert, my comparison may seem innacurate because they're aware of the more nuanced differences between the two. I think that's the root of your misunderstanding.


It was in the 12-page Gravy Freemasonry thread. I didn't bring up the topic, however. I had also disagreed with an "admin" (the one with the 'mean people suck' avatar) last night who was saying that the NIST proved that the fires didn't weaken the steel in the WTC at all. (this was in the Kevin Ryan Legal Defense thread) But, I was very respectful about that, also, and if you can't politely disagree with people, what's the point of having a forum?

[tsig]

There must have been a reason for god to create women...
...to torture us innocent, hairy, beings

I just piced on innocent

We all are guilty of living.

[Oliver]

This was, I believe:

It was in the 12-page Gravy Freemasonry thread. I didn't bring up the topic, however. I had also disagreed with an "admin" (the one with the 'mean people suck' avatar) last night who was saying that the NIST proved that the fires didn't weaken the steel in the WTC at all. (this was in the Kevin Ryan Legal Defense thread) But, I was very respectful about that, also, and if you can't politely disagree with people, what's the point of having a forum?

Never mind - the point for them to have a forum is to hoard people
who agree with their theories. And being banned for disagreeing with
an admin is worth the legendary badge of honor:

___________________________________________
Congratulations, Minadin!

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/11107459f6aa36de5a.gif

Brothers and Sisters, we are once again gathered here to
bestow upon a fellow forumite, our highest distinction,
the blue badge of Honor and Courage!

A fellow skeptic, Minadin has fought the good fight,
and yet has been banned by the quote-miners,
google-searchers, and YouTube-vigilantes.

I say, “Yes” unto him!

Having placed his very sanity at risk,… venturing into the
caves of ig-no-rance and ob-fu-sca-tion… to the land, I say
to you, where fertilizer hangs from the trees like Spanish
moss... to that cistern of non-sequiturs... the land where
no math is known…. Yes! I am speaking of that vile
sanctum of braindead barely post pubescent
white boys..... Loose Change Forum v.2.

Yet, our valiant Minadin has returned, perhaps minus
a few brain cells, but nevertheless back to the bosom of
logic and rational thinking.

For your dedication to truth and your steadfast rejection of
[rule8 (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=681416#rule8)], we bestow upon you the highest honor at JREF/CT

The Blue Badge of Honor and Courage.

Wear it proudly for you have braved the harshest
conditions of sheer stupidity known to man.
___________________________________________

[Minadin]

Thanks, Oliver.

Unfortunately, I was not trying to be banned, rather, I was trying to find out how long I could go, posting in a polite and honorable manner, while disagreeing with a lot of their assertions. Perhaps naively, I was hoping that some piece of insight I provided would resonate with at least one person over there, and maybe change a mind or two. At least, I thought, I could get them to correct some of their more obvious mistakes, things like:

- 42 second free-fall times
- Kevin Ryan's letter was an internal memo
- Income taxes are unconstitutional

I didn't mock anyone or even their ideas, I didn't call anyone names or cast doubt about their motives, I didn't spam the board or make any inappropriate posts; in fact, almost all of my posts were directly in response to a question posted by someone else.

Therefore, it's clear to me that the powers that be over there don't really have any desire to have their ideas challeneged in any sort of rigorous way. They don't have any desire to learn or grow. You would think that they would want people with other ideas around, if only to shore up any possible holes in their theories. I guess you would be wrong.

I thought that when they opened these new boards, Russell Pickering said that they would be more open to having a discourse over there, as long as we were couteous and weren't merely "trolling". I wonder what has happened to that ideal. Russell hasn't logged in there in over 2 weeks.

[Oliver]

Thanks, Oliver.

Unfortunately, I was not trying to be banned, rather, I was trying to find out how long I could go, posting in a polite and honorable manner, while disagreeing with a lot of their assertions. Perhaps naively, I was hoping that some piece of insight I provided would resonate with at least one person over there, and maybe change a mind or two. At least, I thought, I could get them to correct some of their more obvious mistakes, things like:

- 42 second free-fall times
- Kevin Ryan's letter was an internal memo
- Income taxes are unconstitutional

I didn't mock anyone or even their ideas, I didn't call anyone names or cast doubt about their motives, I didn't spam the board or make any inappropriate posts; in fact, almost all of my posts were directly in response to a question posted by someone else.

Therefore, it's clear to me that the powers that be over there don't really have any desire to have their ideas challeneged in any sort of rigorous way. They don't have any desire to learn or grow. You would think that they would want people with other ideas around, if only to shore up any possible holes in their theories. I guess you would be wrong.

I thought that when they opened these new boards, Russell Pickering said that they would be more open to having a discourse over there, as long as we were couteous and weren't merely "trolling". I wonder what has happened to that ideal. Russell hasn't logged in there in over 2 weeks.

Maybe Russel is banned to - you never know with these
crazy dictators over there. I guess Quest is one who does
not support Russels idea and IVXX is also someone who
isn´t very neutral. Plus: There are pissed because there
is nothing new to the issue and the board is nearly dead
compared to the old one...

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

A couple of thoughts.

Firstly, we all know how the LC forums are run. Further discussion on this subject is not really productive (though perhaps cathartic).

Secondly, it would appear that LC, in any of its current, or future, incarnations is falling by the wayside when looking at the 9/11 movement as a whole.

Given those talking points, I'd like to see us deemphasize the activities over there and focus more on the movers and shakers (SfT911, Ryan, A. Jones, etc)

Just my US$0.02

[Coritani]

Truth_Sword (http://proxify.co.uk/p/011010A1000110/687474703a2f2f7a31302e696e766973696f6e667265652e63 6f6d2f4c6f6f73655f4368616e67655f466f72756d2f696e64 65782e7068703f73686f77757365723d31333939)

Advanced Member
http://proxify.co.uk/blank.gifhttp://proxify.co.uk/blank.gifhttp://proxify.co.uk/blank.gif

Group: Gone
Posts: 60
Member No.: 1,399
Joined: 5-January 07
'Twas only a matter of time. Banned twice, plus an IP ban!

[Oliver]

Given those talking points, I'd like to see us deemphasize the activities over there and focus more on the movers and shakers (SfT911, Ryan, A. Jones, etc *snip*

Do these guys have fora, too? I mean the Twoofments™ biggest
place of refuge is the nearly dead Loose Change forum, beside
the spacy "Astronauts for Truth™", isn´t it?

[johnny karate]

Unfortunately, I was not trying to be banned, rather, I was trying to find out how long I could go, posting in a polite and honorable manner, while disagreeing with a lot of their assertions. Perhaps naively, I was hoping that some piece of insight I provided would resonate with at least one person over there, and maybe change a mind or two. At least, I thought, I could get them to correct some of their more obvious mistakes, things like:

- 42 second free-fall times
- Kevin Ryan's letter was an internal memo
- Income taxes are unconstitutional

I didn't mock anyone or even their ideas, I didn't call anyone names or cast doubt about their motives, I didn't spam the board or make any inappropriate posts; in fact, almost all of my posts were directly in response to a question posted by someone else.

That's the same exact thing that I did. And after about three weeks of that, which was mostly greeted with naked hostility, I was unceremoniuosly banned.

For the most part, I was just trying to satisfy my intellectual curiousity. I wanted to see what these people are really about. And now I know.

[GlennB]

A couple of thoughts.

Firstly, we all know how the LC forums are run. Further discussion on this subject is not really productive (though perhaps cathartic).

Secondly, it would appear that LC, in any of its current, or future, incarnations is falling by the wayside when looking at the 9/11 movement as a whole.

Given those talking points, I'd like to see us deemphasize the activities over there and focus more on the movers and shakers (SfT911, Ryan, A. Jones, etc)

Just my US$0.02

Well, maybe a few things have slipped through the censors' nets over there lately that might have given one or two more 'rational' LC'ers pause for thought. Maybe ....

I was at a branch of SfT911 - "The Journal of 9/11 Studies" - just a while back looking at a ridiculous analysis of the physics of WTC1+2 collapse. How would anyone respond without submitting a formal article?

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Well, maybe a few things have slipped through the censors' nets over there lately that might have given one or two more 'rational' LC'ers pause for thought. Maybe ....

I was at a branch of SfT911 - "The Journal of 9/11 Studies" - just a while back looking at a ridiculous analysis of the physics of WTC1+2 collapse. How would anyone respond without submitting a formal article?

Post rebuttals here. I'm sure we bloggers would be glad to spread it around as well.

[HeyLeroy]

Strange. They're not 'problems', it just says I'm not 'permitted to use this board'.

Maybe they IP banned me without banning the Truth_Sword account. Can you even do that?
I think they can ban an IP range....

Thanks very much for the compliments.

I first believed in the CT. Then I read Gravy's Loose Change Guide. It changed everything. What struck me most was not the errors in the truth movement, but the flat out lies. I found JREF when I was googling something about WTC 7. I'm happy I did - I like it here.

Welcome to the NWO shill fold!:D

I think they went on a hunting spree today and eliminated all skeptics (again.)

The 12 page Gravy thread was also erased.

They didn't get that new Fuzzhead person yet. He/she be a ninja anyone?

[HyJinX]

HeyLeroy...where the heck is your pissed-off cat avatar?

[~enigma~]

Welcome to the NWO shill fold!:D



http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/879045627a2870bd1.jpg

Watch it bub. I am the NWO liaison around here.

[HeyLeroy]

Oop, sorry. No need to call the union!

[HyJinX]

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/879045627a2870bd1.jpg

Watch it bub. I am the NWO liaison around here.


Oh yeah? Well...I ate the owl.

[HeyLeroy]

HeyLeroy...where the heck is your pissed-off cat avatar?

Darat's cat recently died. I couldn't put a black arm-band on murderkitty, so out of mourning I've taken him off for a few days. He'll be back.

[Oliver]

I think they can ban an IP range.... *snip*

They can. I created a test-board at InvisionFree to take
a look behind the curtain. The Admin options are pretty
nice, even if a little bit indistinct.

Check it out - it´s free:
http://s6.invisionfree.com/in/register.php

[HyJinX]

Now I feel like a boob for posting a cat picture :(

Condolences to Darat on his loss.

[~enigma~]

Darat's cat recently died. I couldn't put a black arm-band on murderkitty, so out of mourning I've taken him off for a few days. He'll be back.
Oops...sorry Darat. On behalf of the NWO I would like to offer our condolences. Please accept this token of appreciation for your vouluntary service as an administrator here from the NWO and the International Lion's Club...

http://img69.imageshack.us/img69/6918/g2089ny9.jpg

ETA - there should be a comma somewhere in there...you decide :)

[Firestone]

Edit: Good lord, Christophera is now posting on the "Why Wasnt This Found In Rubble?" thread. Heavens.He didn't last long there. He has already be banned. :( (no irony here)

[HeyLeroy]

Yet Fuzzhead is still going!

[HyJinX]

Quoted from Look-up at the LC forum:


Controlled Demolition of WTC is a fact. There has been no argument presented at JREF or in any official investigation to explain how the burning and possible sagging of some trusses 80 floors up would cause the 79 floors below to crumble into dust. Except by use of explosives that is. The only way that could be done is an inside job. If you'd like to present a theory of how Islamic fundamentalist-extremists could have planted the explosives... go ahead Make My Day.

Apparently look-up hasn't been here in a while.

[HeyLeroy]

Spoke too soon. I Fuzzhead ninja just took the bullet.

[Oliver]

Spoke too soon. I Fuzzhead ninja just took the bullet.

You were banned? What did you say and do you
own a badge already?

[HyJinX]

which thread was it Heyleroy?

[Firestone]

Is there a way on the LC Forum to see all the posts of a specific member?

[HeyLeroy]

Yep, got my badge already. Fuzzhead really peeved Poxdog in the 'CD Unlikely' thread I started by calling Avery et al liars. He then had the nerve to post 'opinion against' (with reference) in the 'Molten Metal after 8 Weeks' thread. Both are in the 'World Trade Center' section. If anyonce can explain how to discern the link from the porxy page, I'll post 'em.

(ETA) We need some new Conspiracy Fantasists to come on by; this is getting to be like the Debunker's Community here.

Fresh meat, I say.

[GlennB]

Post rebuttals here. I'm sure we bloggers would be glad to spread it around as well.



OK - but I'll quote somebody else if that's all right :

Responding to an article at
http://worldtradecentertruth.com/articles/Journal_5_PTransferRoss.pdf
(an article emanating from one branch or other of SfT) concerning the physics of a single storey collapse at WTC1 or 2, it was mentioned that :

His analysis is based on some very strange premises indeed :

"Analysis:
The falling upper section with a velocity of no more than 8.5 metres per second at impact would meet resistance from the impacted columns and have as its first task the necessity to load these columns through their elastic range and thereafter through the plastic shortening phase. We shall firstly examine this incremental time period...."

(my bolding)

In other words he's assuming the lower columns are being "impacted" as if the first floor to be hit was covered in a massive steel plate which would distribute the falling load evenly across the (still intact, pristine) lower columns.

There is no real-life scenario where this approach to the calculations is even remotely justified.

There followed a discussion where it was pointed out that the ends of severed core columns would not meet "dead square" and lead to a "bounce" (trust me - see the original essay :rolleyes: - the word is used) . In the debate it was suggested that columns in both sections would be impacting with floor trusses, horizontal beams would be hitting each other etc etc. In other words, a 'chaotic' collision that is totally ignored by the "learned" original analysis.

Having read the essay a few times following that, it can only be described as "a big steaming, festering, maggot-ridden pile of poo".
Feel free to quote me :)

(eta: apologies if this is old - I'll keep my eyes open for 'new' over there)

[HyJinX]

fuzzhead called Roxdog....fuxdogs.

:dl:

[HeyLeroy]

Well, Poxdog did call him a MORON and a nazi.

[GlennB]

Now I feel like a boob for posting a cat picture :(

Condolences to Darat on his loss.

Yes. Cats are good. (though they can be naughty, but that's good too)

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

OK - but I'll quote somebody else if that's all right :

Responding to an article at
http://worldtradecentertruth.com/articles/Journal_5_PTransferRoss.pdf
(an article emanating from one branch or other of SfT) concerning the physics of a single storey collapse at WTC1 or 2, it was mentioned that :

His analysis is based on some very strange premises indeed :

"Analysis:
The falling upper section with a velocity of no more than 8.5 metres per second at impact would meet resistance from the impacted columns and have as its first task the necessity to load these columns through their elastic range and thereafter through the plastic shortening phase. We shall firstly examine this incremental time period...."

(my bolding)

In other words he's assuming the lower columns are being "impacted" as if the first floor to be hit was covered in a massive steel plate which would distribute the falling load evenly across the (still intact, pristine) lower columns.

There is no real-life scenario where this approach to the calculations is even remotely justified.

There followed a discussion where it was pointed out that the ends of severed core columns would not meet "dead square" and lead to a "bounce" (trust me - see the original essay :rolleyes: - the word is used) . In the debate it was suggested that columns in both sections would be impacting with floor trusses, horizontal beams would be hitting each other etc etc. In other words, a 'chaotic' collision that is totally ignored by the "learned" original analysis.

Having read the essay a few times following that, it can only be described as "a big steaming, festering, maggot-ridden pile of poo".
Feel free to quote me :)

(eta: apologies if this is old - I'll keep my eyes open for 'new' over there)





Done: http://arkanwolfshade.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!9E151F6EB6C7A35D!330.entry

[Calcas]

A post from Merc.

"Cool man,

But just so you know, that only requires more theorizing than what's needed.

We need to abandon the small plane (and the missile) IMO, because it will only cause more division and more debate.

It was a large plane.

It flew over. No one told us about a small plane. The witnesses at the Citgo practically followed it until the explosion, I am sure they would have seen something from the right side or the South side of the Citgo.

What if the large plane dropped the debris?

Or the debris was blown from the trailers or near them?"

[Pardalis]

But just so you know, that only requires more theorizing than what's needed.

Wow, a conspiracy theorist who is too much theorizing? :boggled:

[tsig]

Maybe Russel is banned to - you never know with these
crazy dictators over there. I guess Quest is one who does
not support Russels idea and IVXX is also someone who
isn´t very neutral. Plus: There are pissed because there
is nothing new to the issue and the board is nearly dead
compared to the old one...

Maybe if we quit the blak ops the board would die?

Were do I go for unemloyment?

Sad..

[EvilBiker]

Well, Poxdog did call him a MORON and a nazi.

Oh yes, Roxdog is quite the piece of work. Take a look at this:

http://www.signs-of-the-times.org/signs/editorials/signs20060704_TheBlackestofLies.php

[Firestone]

h8bush (http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=2739) has found a real "smoking gun":

My aunt had a women working for her and she married an Arab, they where married for a few years and then her co-workers husband told her not to go to New York on Sept 11 and he disappeared...

(just thought i should share this piece of truth)

The reactions are great. His comrades want evidence, talk about urban legends, imply he is lying, and of course:

Did anyone ever stop to consider that maybe H8Bush is actually a troll who posts outrageous bs like this and then laughs when some of us here take the bait? It seems pretty suspicious to me.

[HeyLeroy]

Oh yes, Roxdog is quite the piece of work. Take a look at this:

http://www.signs-of-the-times.org/signs/editorials/signs20060704_TheBlackestofLies.php

Not long ago, I said the alternative media is broken. But the alternative media is not just broken. By and large, it is controlled, co-opted, doomed, diseased, dysfunctional, and basically dead in the water. It's devolved into a stinking cesspool of lies and filth that is anything but alternative or truthful, and serves no patriot, truth seeker, or human being for that matter. The only entity it DOES serve is the enemy. More aptly put, the alternative media is fully exposed as another facet of the enemy. It is the enemy. There is no movement, patriot or otherwise. All that exists is a fa�ade, a sham, a caricature of a movement and an alternative media. This is garbage dressed up as truth, the kind of manure that busts the pipes.

If an already extensive lineup of censors, cowards, fear-mongers, hypocrites, sell-outs, grifters, con-men, compulsive liars and weird men prancing around in black briefs promoting peak oil and population reduction wasn't enough for you to absorb, then by all means, get a belly full of the psychopaths at Revere Radio Network. Every infiltrated truth effort is allotted its share of psychopaths, I suppose. Welcome to the Cuckoo's Nest.

Oh, my. It's surprising someone this paranoid isn't curled up in the fetal position sucking his thumb.

[EvilBiker]

Oh, my. It's surprising someone this paranoid isn't curled up in the fetal position sucking his thumb.

Yeah, definitely got an axe to grind, I would say.

I do agree that painting the whole alternative media fraternity with the same oozing brush is a bit much, but reading on, I do think it is somewhat justified in Revere Radio's case.

[Orphia Nay]

I see a skeptic called Ripley 29 is now "Gone" today.

[Minadin]

My only regret about being banned there is that I was not able to post my pictures:

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/1253245ae6cf5b1ee6.jpg
http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/1253245ae6cf556e33.jpg

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/1253245ae6d16eee80.jpg
http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/1253245ae6cf58a251.jpg
in This thread:

http://www.proxygem.com/cgi-bin/nph-proxy.cgi/010110A/http/z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php=3fshowtopic=3d2346&st=3d30

Of course, I would have probably been banned shortly after they saw the jref logo on those.

[HeyLeroy]

I see a skeptic called Ripley 29 is now "Gone" today.

Rip posts here! Come and get yer badge!

[T.A.M.]

A post from Merc.

"Cool man,

But just so you know, that only requires more theorizing than what's needed.

We need to abandon the small plane (and the missile) IMO, because it will only cause more division and more debate.

It was a large plane.

It flew over. No one told us about a small plane. The witnesses at the Citgo practically followed it until the explosion, I am sure they would have seen something from the right side or the South side of the Citgo.

What if the large plane dropped the debris?

Or the debris was blown from the trailers or near them?"


I love this. I would like to bronze it, and show it to all the boys and girls as a perfect example of the word "STUPIDITY".

OMG...I am simply in awe.

TAM

[uk_dave]

It flew over. No one told us about a small plane. The witnesses at the Citgo practically followed it until the explosion, I am sure they would have seen something from the right side or the South side of the Citgo.

What the hell? They didn't see it fly over?

[Arus808]

no. they are assuming that the "Explosion" distracted them from seeing the flyover or that big ball of red/black smoke hid the flyover

[Calcas]

There is a guy named "Raven" over there that posted some good stuff about the white smoke behind the one pic of AA77 before it hit the Pentagon.

I PM'd him a couple of times and now he can't accept PM's...it says his account is "validating". This after 167 posts.

He wasn't really familiar with this board so I sent out an invite. He seemed like a good guy who simply wasn't sold on a couple of aspects of 911.

Check out his links on this thread. He has a few different posts on this page...

http://www.bumbaclart.info/nph-index.pl/111110A/http/z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=2620&st=120

Although, I just noticed Raven pretty much believes in the WTC CD theory. Still, he seems the type that would listen to evidence and logic.

P.S. to Killtown, terror, roxpuppy, and the rest. I know you guys lurk here.

I'm in your "ready room." It seems the password wasn't so secure after all. You better start the witch hunts...

[Miragememories]

Yes Raven is a good apple.

Many here could learn from his good example.

Like myself, he maintains an open mind about the events of 9/11 and doesn't let others do his thinking for him.

I very much value the insight that JREF skeptics can bring to the LC Forums because too many there have been converted but are not really giving enough thought to their new found beliefs. Good thoughtful skeptics force us to consider the validity of our beliefs.

Unfortunately for both sides of the argument, too many members are bigoted and stand by their beliefs with an almost religious fanaticism which benefits no one.

I harbour no ill feeling towards anyone here who treats me with polite respect and I intend to return the same.

Hopefully members here who have seen my posts in the LC forums accept that I'm only interested in the common good and attempt to engage in honest fair-minded dialogue whenever possible.

Please keep in mind that the LC Forums, just like the JREF Forums allow anyone, regardless of age, education or experience to join. With such diverse memberships, you'll get quality and you'll get crap.

Hopefully, the quality members on both sides will resist the seductive mob influence of those who aren't interested in positive meaningful dialogues.

MM

[mrfreeze]

Yes, but the difference is that over here as long as you don't break any rules you don't get banned just for disagreeing with the official story. And if someone is banned or suspended, you can look and see what it was for, and protest their banning if you feel it was unjust. Whereas on the LC boards, you just disappear one day with no explanation or way to protest it.

But that aside, welcome to the boards.

[Orphia Nay]

"You do not have permission to view this board".

And now I see by proxy that I am "Gone".

My last post was in The Skeptics forum, in look-up's thread, "Skeptics need a refresher".

Killian said this:

as to what kind of explosives were used, im not a demo guy so i cant say exactly. frankly the exact chemical compound used is not that important to me. it did what it needed to do. i'll humor you with a partial answer as to what kind: a conventional kind of explosive (cutting charge) was used in an unconventional demolition method on wtc's 1&2. onelayer of demolition for the supporting core of the structure, and added layer of demolition was used to demolish all the pieces that would normally remain intact inspite of the demolition of the core structural supports. these are the pieces being ejected outward into much smaller pieces. a third level of explosives was placed in the basement to help cover up the evidence for demo's 1 and 2. these explosives were more than likely parked in vehicles in the basements of these buildings , and may have been the thermite (but possibly other compound) that was used to keep the place cooking for the many weeks after the collapses.


I wrote:
Killian, are you saying they blew the floors into bits, then they blew the bits into bits, and then they blew the bits of bits into bits?

It wasn't one of my most compassionate posts, but hey, I admit it - I'm only human.

[Coritani]

Please keep in mind that the LC Forums, just like the JREF Forums allow anyone, regardless of age, education or experience to join. With such diverse memberships, you'll get quality and you'll get crap.

Hopefully, the quality members on both sides will resist the seductive mob influence of those who aren't interested in positive meaningful dialogues.

MM

Indeed. The problem is that at the LC forum, skeptics get banned for no reason at all (such as me, Eddykola, Antiman, etc etc) while truthers can do anything they want.

Case in point: I get banned for doing nothing, while Roxdog flames all over the place, and is even praised by one of the mods for it.

Welcome to the forums, by the way.

[Miragememories]

Thank you mrfreeze.

I'm not a big believer in banning people and have no administrative influence in the LC Forums.

I would like to see the rationale behind LC decisions for individual bannings, and possibly the allowance for input from members regarding final decisions.

In some cases the banning hasn't come as a big surprise, as I'm sure is the case with certain banned members here.

I'm thankful that I won't be banned from the JREF Forums merely because I'm a member of the LC Forum as well.

MM

[johnny karate]

Mirage, welcome to the JREF forum.

You're not going to find any "bigotry" here. Everyone here has an open mind.

However, you will be required to support your assertions with evidence or expert testimony for them to be given any credence. Speculation and layman analysis will not be accepted.

Good luck and I look forward to perhaps debating with you again.

[beachnut]

Yes Raven is a good apple.

Many here could learn from his good example.

Like myself, he maintains an open mind about the events of 9/11 and doesn't let others do his thinking for him.

I very much value the insight that JREF skeptics can bring to the LC Forums because too many there have been converted but are not really giving enough thought to their new found beliefs. Good thoughtful skeptics force us to consider the validity of our beliefs.

Unfortunately for both sides of the argument, too many members are bigoted and stand by their beliefs with an almost religious fanaticism which benefits no one.

I harbour no ill feeling towards anyone here who treats me with polite respect and I intend to return the same.

Hopefully members here who have seen my posts in the LC forums accept that I'm only interested in the common good and attempt to engage in honest fair-minded dialogue whenever possible.

Please keep in mind that the LC Forums, just like the JREF Forums allow anyone, regardless of age, education or experience to join. With such diverse memberships, you'll get quality and you'll get crap.

Hopefully, the quality members on both sides will resist the seductive mob influence of those who aren't interested in positive meaningful dialogues.

MM

It will be neat when the LC guys come up with some facts before they get old.

There is not a fact to be found in LC videos; just lies.

You hit the nail on its head! Belief is all you have. Try facts when it comes to the real world; facts are much better than lies. LC should find some before the followers actually find physics and the ability to think for themselves which it seems most forgot how to use their brains to think..

What facts do you have? LC is fiction and you have no factual support for it. Poor Dylan is lacking facts; can you help him?

[GlennB]

...
Please keep in mind that the LC Forums, just like the JREF Forums allow anyone, regardless of age, education or experience to join. With such diverse memberships, you'll get quality and you'll get crap.
...
MM

Hello again, MM

Slight difference is that you could get fairly stroppy over here and still be tolerated. Maybe for about 30 pages of debate, even. People would debate your evidence/point of view all day long (us sad gits).
At LC you get banned just for being a sceptic (unless the mods are away making films :D )

Anyhoo - welcome, and please present your evidence. You will need it. Mere assertions and 'argument from incredulity' won't get you very far without a gentle reminder or two. Apparently it only takes 4 muscles to slap someone round the head

pip pip!

[Orphia Nay]

There is a guy named "Raven" over there that posted some good stuff about the white smoke behind the one pic of AA77 before it hit the Pentagon.

I PM'd him a couple of times and now he can't accept PM's...it says his account is "validating". This after 167 posts.

He wasn't really familiar with this board so I sent out an invite. He seemed like a good guy who simply wasn't sold on a couple of aspects of 911.

Check out his links on this thread. He has a few different posts on this page...

http://www.bumbaclart.info/nph-index.pl/111110A/http/z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=2620&st=120

Although, I just noticed Raven pretty much believes in the WTC CD theory. Still, he seems the type that would listen to evidence and logic.



He practically bit my head off when I suggested he investigate the NORAD "stand down" and the Pentagon "missile defence system" with the same skepticism as he had the AA77 pic. He thought I was "putting words into his mouth", and commented, "stupid skeptics".


P.S. to Killtown, terror, roxpuppy, and the rest. I know you guys lurk here.

I'm in your "ready room." It seems the password wasn't so secure after all. You better start the witch hunts...

:D :D :D That's great, Calcas!! Is it filled with all those paranoid threads about suspected disinfo agents that keep disappearing from the main forum?

[Calcas]

:D :D :D That's great, Calcas!! Is it filled with all those paranoid threads about suspected disinfo agents that keep disappearing from the main forum?[/QUOTE]

Actually, they play poor IVXX like a fool.

KT, rox, and terror simply tell him what to do...

[mrfreeze]

You should save copies of as much of it as you can before they find out and figure out a way to block you. If nothing else it would be quite interesting reading for the rest of us. Plus there may be some nuggets that could be spread over to the "not as privileged" troofers.

*edit* Wasn't there a program linked to somewhere on this board that basically did printscreen only would work for entire pages of message board threads and the like?

[Mancman]

The simple fact of the matter here is that this person cannot even spell SENTENCE CORRECTLY. How the hell are you going to even begin explaining to me what occurred on 9/11, IF YOU CANNOT SPELL SENTENCE CORRECTLEY.

Funny.

[uk_dave]

FidelCastro:

You know, the one thing the truth movement could use in the forefront are babes. Think about it. Are random dudes on the street, especially teenage to middle aged males more likely to hold onto something handed them by a dude in a black "Investigate 9/11" t-shirt, or a really hot girl? Now the JREFER's have that Abby Scott chick, surely we can do better right? I mean we had that one chick who pissed on the flag last 4th of July, but she kind of disappeared and wasn't quite what I have in mind for this idea. So in short, where are all the hot truther women? I know there must be some on here, so lets hear it!

http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=2813


:dl:

[HeyLeroy]

Got my badge, does that qualify me for a 'ninja' title?

If yes, any suggestions?

[uk_dave]

Vegan ninja?

[HeyLeroy]

I'm not really a vegan, I just liked the paradox.:D

[GlennB]

Drat. Banned again.
Dared to ask for a list of the "errors" in LC that they admitted to in the interview with Gravy.

[jhunter1163]

You're supposed to look them up for yourself, Glenn. You missed the whole POINT. Sheesh, does Dylan have to explain EVERYTHING to you?

[/sarcasm]

[HeyLeroy]

Talking about JREFers, jackchit has this to say:jachchit: Rox its a complete waste of time and energy bothering with these people, its the pent up sexual frustration that makes these minorities do this kind of thing,

LCF>General Info>Lounge>Jref Erase Obl Connection On Wikipedia Entry, about Suzanne Jovin murder

[Miragememories]

It will be neat when the LC guys come up with some facts before they get old.

There is not a fact to be found in LC videos; just lies.

You hit the nail on its head! Belief is all you have. Try facts when it comes to the real world; facts are much better than lies. LC should find some before the followers actually find physics and the ability to think for themselves which it seems most forgot how to use their brains to think..

What facts do you have? LC is fiction and you have no factual support for it. Poor Dylan is lacking facts; can you help him?

Hmm. What world do you live in beachnut?

I couldn't agree with you more that facts are much much better than lies.

I'll apologize right now if I've told any lies.

Good advice on using the brain to think. I'll remember that bonus tip as well.

LC is fiction? Hmm..I've yet to see a documentary that doesn't contain some fiction. Although unlike you, I've yet to see a documentary that was 100% fiction.

I do know that if you want people to have an ounce of respect for what you post, making absolute general statements is not the way to go about it.

MM

[R.Mackey]

LC is fiction? Hmm..I've yet to see a documentary that doesn't contain some fiction. Although unlike you, I've yet to see a documentary that was 100% fiction.

I do know that if you want people to have an ounce of respect for what you post, making absolute general statements is not the way to go about it.

Welcome to the JREF forum, Miragememories. I'm not going to indulge in personal attacks, but I am curious:

I will agree that it is difficult to eradicate all errors, even in the most carefully researched documentary, but there is a certain threshold at which the narrative falls apart, and we must consider it fiction.

What about Loose Change? What parts of it are not fiction? What parts of it are true, and what parts are presented fairly? I've only seen the do-over a couple of times, but I personally counted so many obvious errors that it would seem difficult to forge any argument with what remains.

So I'm curious about your impressions of it.

[Coritani]

Hmm. What world do you live in beachnut?

I couldn't agree with you more that facts are much much better than lies.

I'll apologize right now if I've told any lies.

Good advice on using the brain to think. I'll remember that bonus tip as well.

LC is fiction? Hmm..I've yet to see a documentary that doesn't contain some fiction. Although unlike you, I've yet to see a documentary that was 100% fiction.

I do know that if you want people to have an ounce of respect for what you post, making absolute general statements is not the way to go about it.

MM

Have you read Mark Roberts' LC guide? It really shows how LC is full of lies.

And noone has professionally refuted the LC guide yet either, to my knowledge.

[Miragememories]

Hello again, MM

Slight difference is that you could get fairly stroppy over here and still be tolerated. Maybe for about 30 pages of debate, even. People would debate your evidence/point of view all day long (us sad gits).
At LC you get banned just for being a sceptic (unless the mods are away making films :D )

Anyhoo - welcome, and please present your evidence. You will need it. Mere assertions and 'argument from incredulity' won't get you very far without a gentle reminder or two. Apparently it only takes 4 muscles to slap someone round the head

pip pip!

Thank you for the warm welcome GlennB.

I confess I've lurked here a bit so I do have idea what might be expected.

From what I've seen, I wonder if there's much value in attempting to present evidence or argue a point of view?

The diehards from LC and JREF seem to be pretty much polarized in their thinking and I certainly don't claim to have any 'new' smoking gun revelations.

As I said in an earlier post, I regret the banning process at LC but I have no relationship with management there. They have yet to acknowledge my existence.

Hopefully I won't violate any of the rules at JREF that might cause me to be banned.

MM

[Miragememories]

Mirage, welcome to the JREF forum.

You're not going to find any "bigotry" here. Everyone here has an open mind.

However, you will be required to support your assertions with evidence or expert testimony for them to be given any credence. Speculation and layman analysis will not be accepted.

Good luck and I look forward to perhaps debating with you again.

Well johnny karate, why am I not surprised to find you here.

I do miss our frustrating discussions in the LC Forums and I posted that your banning was regretable though not surprising.

Yes God knows I'm well aware that anything I say has to be expert qualified and peer-reviewed before you will grace it with the least bit of consideration.

With that in mind, I suspect you and I will have little meaningful dialogue as I've pretty well said all I can to you on that subject.

Thank you for the welcome though.

MM

[ConspiRaider]

Well johnny karate, why am I not surprised to find you here.

I do miss our frustrating discussions in the LC Forums and I posted that your banning was regretable though not surprising.

Yes God knows I'm well aware that anything I say has to be expert qualified and peer-reviewed before you will grace it with the least bit of consideration.

With that in mind, I suspect you and I will have little meaningful dialogue as I've pretty well said all I can to you on that subject.

Thank you for the welcome though.

MM
So far you've said a lot about what you will not do here at JREF. Got any plans on what you will do? Wanna talk about anything specific?

[beachnut]

Hmm. What world do you live in beachnut?

I couldn't agree with you more that facts are much much better than lies.

I'll apologize right now if I've told any lies.

Good advice on using the brain to think. I'll remember that bonus tip as well.

LC is fiction? Hmm..I've yet to see a documentary that doesn't contain some fiction. Although unlike you, I've yet to see a documentary that was 100% fiction.

I do know that if you want people to have an ounce of respect for what you post, making absolute general statements is not the way to go about it.

MM

Please feel free to post anything that is true in the LC video. I have found no facts and find LC videos to be complete fiction as Dylan orignally set out to do. Fiction. He even tells you the same. I started as fiction and is fiction now. A joke. Please help me find one fact in LC.

There are no smoking guns in LC yet; nor do I expect them ever. If you have one new smoking gun after the beam weapon by Judy Wood, let us hear it.

[Miragememories]

FidelCastro:

You know, the one thing the truth movement could use in the forefront are babes. Think about it. Are random dudes on the street, especially teenage to middle aged males more likely to hold onto something handed them by a dude in a black "Investigate 9/11" t-shirt, or a really hot girl? Now the JREFER's have that Abby Scott chick, surely we can do better right? I mean we had that one chick who pissed on the flag last 4th of July, but she kind of disappeared and wasn't quite what I have in mind for this idea. So in short, where are all the hot truther women? I know there must be some on here, so lets hear it!

:dl:

Quite right Dave.

Sex sells!

MM

[GlennB]

Thank you for the warm welcome GlennB.

I confess I've lurked here a bit so I do have idea what might be expected.

From what I've seen, I wonder if there's much value in attempting to present evidence or argue a point of view?

The diehards from LC and JREF seem to be pretty much polarized in their thinking and I certainly don't claim to have any 'new' smoking gun revelations.

As I said in an earlier post, I regret the banning process at LC but I have no relationship with management there. They have yet to acknowledge my existence.

Hopefully I won't violate any of the rules at JREF that might cause me to be banned.

MM

Hi MM

You would have to work very hard to get banned here :)

(p.s. I like the way you bold the ID of the person you address. It's courteous and I'll do the same from now on)

While you're around - there was a debate raging over there at LC regarding concrete dust at WTC. It wasn't at all clear what your position was. Do you believe it was reduced to powder or *not* reduced to powder? This relates closely to your posts last night about pulverisation. I never did see your definition of "pulverised". Perhaps I missed it?

[Miragememories]

Welcome to the JREF forum, Miragememories. I'm not going to indulge in personal attacks, but I am curious:

I will agree that it is difficult to eradicate all errors, even in the most carefully researched documentary, but there is a certain threshold at which the narrative falls apart, and we must consider it fiction.

What about Loose Change? What parts of it are not fiction? What parts of it are true, and what parts are presented fairly? I've only seen the do-over a couple of times, but I personally counted so many obvious errors that it would seem difficult to forge any argument with what remains.

So I'm curious about your impressions of it.

Thank you for the kind welcome R.Mackey

And thank you for resisting the impulse to launch an unwarranted personal attack.

I have no wish to dissect LC.

I have spoken up in posts in the LC Forums about content in the video that should be addressed. Yes I agree it still has errors and as a professional documentary editor for public TV, I feel no harm is done by coming clean and correcting the errors. I'm only interested in truth not conjecture.

Mark Roberts is by no means squeeky clean in his counter documentaries. His unrestrained bias only serves to undermine his message.

My involvement in the LC Forums has more to do with my quest for truth than my blind belief in the LC documentary. I have watched many 9/11 documentaries and many are of a higher quality than LC.

MM

[R.Mackey]

I have no wish to dissect LC.

I have spoken up in posts in the LC Forums about content in the video that should be addressed. Yes I agree it still has errors and as a professional documentary editor for public TV, I feel no harm is done by coming clean and correcting the errors. I'm only interested in truth not conjecture.
Be that as it may, you complained above when others referred to LC as "fiction," and remarked that other documentaries may have errors as well. But if you cannot be more precise about it, then this is nothing more than a form of equivocation.

In my personal opinion, Loose Change is a work of fiction, and moreover one that misleads its audience about its true nature. Now then, if you disagree with that assessment, I'd be curious to understand why.

Mark Roberts is by no means squeeky clean in his counter documentaries. His unrestrained bias only serves to undermine his message.
Likewise, without support, this is what I would call an "unwarranted personal attack."

Has poster Gravy made errors in his "counter-documentaries?" What are they? And, if there are none, will you retract your statement?

[WildCat]

First of all, welcome to the JREF forum MM.

Mark Roberts is by no means squeeky clean in his counter documentaries. His unrestrained bias only serves to undermine his message.
I see this a lot from the truthers about Mark Roberts. I have yet to see a truther find a single error in any of his papers, just complaints about his tone. Have you found any errors?

eta: damn Mackey and his fast fingers...

[TjW]

I'm not really a vegan, I just liked the paradox.:D

Oh, man. Next you'll be telling us you're not a cannibal, either.

[beachnut]

Hmm. What world do you live in beachnut?


Where one can calculate the energy in the WTC tower and see there is no need to make up a CD CT on 9/11. If you believe in LC videos, a course in physics may help you use your own brain and figure out LC is telling lies. (fact)


I couldn't agree with you more that facts are much much better than lies.


The you can save some time and avoid watching LC videos. (fact there are no facts to support the conclusions you find in LC. In fact Dylan says not much of anything does he.)

I'll apologize right now if I've told any lies.

Have you?

Good advice on using the brain to think. I'll remember that bonus tip as well.


I have observed most CTers fail to remember what you call a bonus tip.

LC is fiction? Hmm..I've yet to see a documentary that doesn't contain some fiction. Although unlike you, I've yet to see a documentary that was 100% fiction.


LC is a fictional talk on 9/11. Just basic lies. When you find some facts in LC video it will be a big deal. Please share that smoking gun of facts in LC videos when you find one.

I do know that if you want people to have an ounce of respect for what you post, making absolute general statements is not the way to go about it.

Let me be specific; I have watch the LC video and can find no facts in it to support any CT that any truth movmement supports.

What specific fact have you found?

I agree making up lies about 9/11 like LC videos do is the most disrespectful thing anyone can do. Supporting lies on 9/11 and making up lies is disrespectful. LC video to me is very disrespectful. If LC had any facts on 9/11 it would earn a Pulitzer Prize. So if you support LC video you are disrespectful for not having facts and you help tell lies.

Other than that welcome. But making up CT out of thin air is all the truth movement has so far. 5 years and the truth movement still has no story, no facts, and the big one is no Pulitzer Prize. Facts would turn the tide for the truth movement. But the truth movement uses squibs with no blood as proof of explosives with not noise but it is just air.

Air. Talk. Hearsay. What do you bring?

Are you a NORAD stood down? Sorry I was in the Air Force, we did not stand down. Are you a terrorist can't fly guy? Sorry I am a pilot, any kid could crash a 757/767 into a building.

Facts are what LC lacks. Most CT guys fall for talk as being proof. Why do people settle for the lies of the truth movement, as in LC.

[Miragememories]

Have you read Mark Roberts' LC guide? It really shows how LC is full of lies.

And noone has professionally refuted the LC guide yet either, to my knowledge.

Yes I have read it.

To me the message is what's critical.

Mark Roberts tends to get bogged down in minutae and flagrant bias rather than focusing on the important issues. As an editor, I'm compelled to always think about audience reaction. With regards to Mark, the audience isn't impressed by examples of obvious personal prejudice, and with regards to Dylan, the audience can think for themselves, and don't want a lot of someone else's speculation.

I get the impression that both Dylan Avery and Mark Roberts are more concerned with scoring ego points off each other and their followers and less concerned about the about overall quality of their presentations.

God I hope I don't get banned on LC for saying that.

MM

[LashL]

You should save copies of as much of it as you can before they find out and figure out a way to block you. If nothing else it would be quite interesting reading for the rest of us. Plus there may be some nuggets that could be spread over to the "not as privileged" troofers.

*edit* Wasn't there a program linked to somewhere on this board that basically did printscreen only would work for entire pages of message board threads and the like?

Yes, I posted a link to it on a thread here but I can't remember which thread :)

Anyway, the utility is called FastStone Screen Capture and it's great.

http://www.faststone.org/FSCaptureDetail.htm

[WildCat]

Yes I have read it.

To me the message is what's critical.

Mark Roberts tends to get bogged down in minutae and flagrant bias rather than focusing on the important issues. As an editor, I'm compelled to always think about audience reaction. With regards to Mark, the audience isn't impressed by examples of obvious personal prejudice, and with regards to Dylan, the audience can think for themselves, and don't want a lot of someone else's speculation.
So you found no errors?

[beachnut]

Mark Roberts is by no means squeeky clean in his counter documentaries. His unrestrained bias only serves to undermine his message.
MM

Any examples? Some facts? Which topics do you refer too.

You should listen to someone who told me: I do know that if you want people to have an ounce of respect for what you post, making absolute general statements is not the way to go about it.

[Miragememories]

Hi MM

You would have to work very hard to get banned here :)

(p.s. I like the way you bold the ID of the person you address. It's courteous and I'll do the same from now on)

While you're around - there was a debate raging over there at LC regarding concrete dust at WTC. It wasn't at all clear what your position was. Do you believe it was reduced to powder or *not* reduced to powder? This relates closely to your posts last night about pulverisation. I never did see your definition of "pulverised". Perhaps I missed it?

Powder shmowder..not a fine detail I care to get into (no pun intended).

I personally feel and I have clearly stated at LC that the large volume of concrete dust and the relatively limited showing of large concrete debris suggested explosive pulverization more than it did gravity pulverization.

How do we prove this? I have no idea ...but it's my current opinion.

I look at the collapses of WTC 1 & 2 and see a central core volcanic like explosion.

I'm sure the majority here look at it and see a building following a natural collapse sequence after fire has crippled it's structural integrity.

To be quite honest, I hope you are right because I know what it means if I am right.

MM

[Miragememories]

So far you've said a lot about what you will not do here at JREF. Got any plans on what you will do? Wanna talk about anything specific?

Hmm.

Well ConspiRaider did you state what you were going to do when you joined JREF?

I have no idea what I'm going to do. I'm winging it.

My only goal in life is to become better informed and hopefully grow wiser.

No secret agendas here. If I like what you say I'll agree and compliment you. If I think it's BS and I'm feeling brave enough to defend that point of view, I'll post a reply saying so.

Other than that, I can only hope that the folks here treat me with the same respect I intend to show them.

MM

[uk_dave]

Mark Roberts tends to get bogged down in minutae and flagrant bias rather than focusing on the important issues.

Isn't a documentary supposed to go into the minutae? Otherwise it's just opinion, instead of facts.

Are there any of the 'truth' videos or papers which you feel present an unassailable fact based alternative account of 9/11?

[beachnut]

Powder shmowder..not a fine detail I care to get into (no pun intended).

I personally feel and I have clearly stated at LC that the large volume of concrete dust and the relatively limited showing of large concrete debris suggested explosive pulverization more than it did gravity pulverization.

MM

The energy release in the WTC towers was like 1000 500 pound bombs in each tower. Simple fact. This is why there was destruction. No need for explosives. Fact.

The dust in mostly wallboard and insulation. You know wall board, ceiling tiles, spray on fire proofing. There are tons of concrete debris at the WTC.

Go get a hammer and break up you walls made of wall board and then try breaking up your concrete patio. How much dust does the wall board make. Now take a hammer to your ceiling tiles in the basement.

You asked me: Hmm. What world do you live in beachnut?


Good luck with your CT world that you live in.

[Miragememories]

Please feel free to post anything that is true in the LC video. I have found no facts and find LC videos to be complete fiction as Dylan orignally set out to do. Fiction. He even tells you the same. I started as fiction and is fiction now. A joke. Please help me find one fact in LC.

There are no smoking guns in LC yet; nor do I expect them ever. If you have one new smoking gun after the beam weapon by Judy Wood, let us hear it.

I see.

Well beachnut you make it perfectly clear that in your less than humble opinion, LC can be totally painted with a black brush.

It must be nice to feel so certain of yourself.

As a fallible human, my gut feeling is that your wrong and foolish to take such a dogmatic stance but that's your privilege and your welcome to it.

Whenever someone tells me something is all black, I know I'm a fool if I try and persuade them otherwise.

MM

[beachnut]

I see.

Well beachnut you make it perfectly clear that in your less than humble opinion, LC can be totally painted with a black brush.

It must be nice to feel so certain of yourself.

As a fallible human, my gut feeling is that your wrong and foolish to take such a dogmatic stance but that's your privilege and your welcome to it.

Whenever someone tells me something is all black, I know I'm a fool if I try and persuade them otherwise.

MM

Again this reminds me of your advice or statement: I do know that if you want people to have an ounce of respect for what you post, making absolute general statements is not the way to go about it.


Does this mean there will be no facts about why LC is correct?

[Miragememories]

Be that as it may, you complained above when others referred to LC as "fiction," and remarked that other documentaries may have errors as well. But if you cannot be more precise about it, then this is nothing more than a form of equivocation.

In my personal opinion, Loose Change is a work of fiction, and moreover one that misleads its audience about its true nature. Now then, if you disagree with that assessment, I'd be curious to understand why.


Likewise, without support, this is what I would call an "unwarranted personal attack."

Has poster Gravy made errors in his "counter-documentaries?" What are they? And, if there are none, will you retract your statement?

I'm sorry R.Mackey, I wasn't aware that Mark Roberts was the first documentarian to create an error-free film. My humble apologies and I retract any suggestion that his releases have been anything less than perfect.

Regarding LC, I can be more precise but to do so properly, I'd have to review the latest release which alas I haven't done.

I'm sure it is flawed but you'll have to wait until I re-screen it to hear my critique of it. To use a blanket label and smear it as nothing but fiction is way too extreme. I feel statements like that reveal your personal prejudice and clear lack of of objectivity. Regardless of any disagreements I may have with Mark's creations, I wouldn't be so extreme as to judge them as 'fictional'.

MM

[scissorhands]

MM.
If you are here to defend LC then please open a debate about any single issue in it that you think is in anyway misunderstood.

[ConspiRaider]

Powder shmowder..not a fine detail I care to get into (no pun intended).

I personally feel and I have clearly stated at LC that the large volume of concrete dust and the relatively limited showing of large concrete debris suggested explosive pulverization more than it did gravity pulverization.

How do we prove this? I have no idea ...but it's my current opinion.

I look at the collapses of WTC 1 & 2 and see a central core volcanic like explosion.

(bolding mine)

Finally something specific.

Are you suggesting that the central core was packed with molten lava, and then erupted like a volcano via remote control?

[R.Mackey]

I'm sorry R.Mackey, I wasn't aware that Mark Roberts was the first documentarian to create an error-free film. My humble apologies and I retract any suggestion that his releases have been anything less than perfect.
That wasn't what you said. You said, and I quote,

Mark Roberts is by no means squeeky clean in his counter documentaries. His unrestrained bias only serves to undermine his message.
I asked you to back that up. You still have not. Now please, either do so or issue a proper retraction.

I'm sure it is flawed but you'll have to wait until I re-screen it to hear my critique of it. To use a blanket label and smear it as nothing but fiction is way too extreme. I feel statements like that reveal your personal prejudice and clear lack of of objectivity. Regardless of any disagreements I may have with Mark's creations, I wouldn't be so extreme as to judge them as 'fictional'.
They do nothing of the kind. You have seen, I am sure, plenty of expositions in text of the errors contained in "Loose Change". My statement is based upon that analysis, not personal prejudice or lack of objectivity.

As before, you are equivocating. Now, again, please back up your statements with evidence, or retract them. If you can show me how "Loose Change" is not fiction, or how the myriad errors we have found do not damage its thesis, then we will reconsider our opinion. But we will not do so on the basis of your prejudice.

[beachnut]

I'm sorry R.Mackey, I wasn't aware that Mark Roberts was the first documentarian to create an error-free film. My humble apologies and I retract any suggestion that his releases have been anything less than perfect.

Regarding LC, I can be more precise but to do so properly, I'd have to review the latest release which alas I haven't done.

I'm sure it is flawed but you'll have to wait until I re-screen it to hear my critique of it. To use a blanket label and smear it as nothing but fiction is way too extreme. I feel statements like that reveal your personal prejudice and clear lack of of objectivity. Regardless of any disagreements I may have with Mark's creations, I wouldn't be so extreme as to judge them as 'fictional'.

MM

You are a in a religion of 9/11 truth. You are blind by something and have no back ground in science or physics to make you capable of understanding energy or gravity. You fail to read about the subjects you actually make up stories about 9/11 using what, the stuff you could read about? Not facts.

You believe there was someone who placed silent explosives in the WTC. You believe this as other believe in a religion.

You are in a religion based on faith in lies that you and other truthers make up using your imagination. When will you drink the kool-aid? When are you going to go to the next level?

Learn some physics and more about CD. You could come up with better lies.

How come you are so funny! How come you are so ironic, you are in a ironically named group called truth with only lies to support you; you said it best!!! Faith, whether it be in a religion, or in respected institutions, is still blind acceptance to ... In your case fantasy stories! What new story do you have today?

[A W Smith]

Miragememories you were asked what errors did Mark Roberts present. You were asked what, if any, facts were in LC. You present vague generalizations about the way videos are "painted" but have not contested any points nor presented any facts about them. All I am hearing from you is a tap dance. Would you like some dancing shoes?

[GlennB]

Powder shmowder..not a fine detail I care to get into (no pun intended).

I personally feel and I have clearly stated at LC that the large volume of concrete dust and the relatively limited showing of large concrete debris suggested explosive pulverization more than it did gravity pulverization.

How do we prove this? I have no idea ...but it's my current opinion.

I look at the collapses of WTC 1 & 2 and see a central core volcanic like explosion.

I'm sure the majority here look at it and see a building following a natural collapse sequence after fire has crippled it's structural integrity.

To be quite honest, I hope you are right because I know what it means if I am right.

MM

Where does your information on "concrete dust" come from? This seems to be about the third time you've been asked this. I haven't seen you answer the question yet.

There were a number of studies of the lightweight airborne particles from the TT. As I understand it they were investigating the possibility of respiratory complications. They found a high %age of gypsum, asbestos, concrete derivatives, soot, etc. It's not a mystery. The figures are freely available.

The third highest %age by weight in the TT was gypsum drywall. Given the typical particulate sizes of gypsum vs. concrete found at any distance from GZ, this is what we see in the films and photos of dust clouds. Some gypsum, some fibrous material, some concrete powder, some soot....

BTW - what is your definition of "large concrete debris" ?
The size of sand particles?
Gravel?
Pebbles?
Bricks?
Bigger?

Please be clear. We need that definition in order to debate the presence of 'macro' concrete at GZ.

[tsig]

I do know that if you want people to have an ounce of respect for what you post, making absolute general statements is not the way to go about it.

MM

Sounds to me like an absolute general statement.

[Miragememories]

First of all, welcome to the JREF forum MM.


I see this a lot from the truthers about Mark Roberts. I have yet to see a truther find a single error in any of his papers, just complaints about his tone. Have you found any errors?

eta: damn Mackey and his fast fingers...

I stand corrected. I am not prepared to detail any proof that Mark Roberts has ever made a factual error in any of his works.

His bias and conclusions on the other hand are another thing.

MM

[beachnut]

I stand corrected. I am not prepared to detail any proof that Mark Roberts has ever made a factual error in any of his works.

His bias and conclusions on the other hand are another thing.

MM

Yes I can not stand his bias for real facts! And I hate his fact based conclusions. I hate the fact he does not let his political bias show in his conclusions on 9/11. Now I must live up to that unbiased approach in the future no matter what my political biases are! Darn you Mark!!!!!!!!!

Darn you to the facts!

[Miragememories]

Where one can calculate the energy in the WTC tower and see there is no need to make up a CD CT on 9/11. If you believe in LC videos, a course in physics may help you use your own brain and figure out LC is telling lies. (fact)



The you can save some time and avoid watching LC videos. (fact there are no facts to support the conclusions you find in LC. In fact Dylan says not much of anything does he.)



Have you?




I have observed most CTers fail to remember what you call a bonus tip.



LC is a fictional talk on 9/11. Just basic lies. When you find some facts in LC video it will be a big deal. Please share that smoking gun of facts in LC videos when you find one.



Let me be specific; I have watch the LC video and can find no facts in it to support any CT that any truth movmement supports.

What specific fact have you found?

I agree making up lies about 9/11 like LC videos do is the most disrespectful thing anyone can do. Supporting lies on 9/11 and making up lies is disrespectful. LC video to me is very disrespectful. If LC had any facts on 9/11 it would earn a Pulitzer Prize. So if you support LC video you are disrespectful for not having facts and you help tell lies.

Other than that welcome. But making up CT out of thin air is all the truth movement has so far. 5 years and the truth movement still has no story, no facts, and the big one is no Pulitzer Prize. Facts would turn the tide for the truth movement. But the truth movement uses squibs with no blood as proof of explosives with not noise but it is just air.

Air. Talk. Hearsay. What do you bring?

Are you a NORAD stood down? Sorry I was in the Air Force, we did not stand down. Are you a terrorist can't fly guy? Sorry I am a pilot, any kid could crash a 757/767 into a building.

Facts are what LC lacks. Most CT guys fall for talk as being proof. Why do people settle for the lies of the truth movement, as in LC.

You're obviously right beachnut the whole Truth Movement hasn't a leg to stand on. It's truly unfortunate that they didn't encounter your complete and unequivocal knowledge about the subject from the outset.

I'll be sure to get the word out and I'm sure they'll all be gone by tomorrow.

MM

[tsig]

Powder shmowder..not a fine detail I care to get into (no pun intended).

I personally feel and I have clearly stated at LC that the large volume of concrete dust and the relatively limited showing of large concrete debris suggested explosive pulverization more than it did gravity pulverization.

How do we prove this? I have no idea ...but it's my current opinion.

I look at the collapses of WTC 1 & 2 and see a central core volcanic like explosion.

I'm sure the majority here look at it and see a building following a natural collapse sequence after fire has crippled it's structural integrity.

To be quite honest, I hope you are right because I know what it means if I am right.

MM

You can look and I'll do the math and we will see who's right.

[Miragememories]

Isn't a documentary supposed to go into the minutae? Otherwise it's just opinion, instead of facts.

Are there any of the 'truth' videos or papers which you feel present an unassailable fact based alternative account of 9/11?

Well uk_dave most documentaries are original works in themselves rather than rebuttals feeding off the work of others.

My point was that Mark's rebuttal docs are like pinball games where he tries to score points on every undotted "i" rather than focusing on just the 'power' messages.

Hey don't get me wrong. I'm not saying his points aren't targeting errors. I'm saying the audience outside of JREF is going to wonder why he's bothering and are likely gonna be put to sleep by the process.

It's quality not quantity that counts.

Of course that's strictly my opinion. I only cut this stuff for a living but what do I know.

Regarding unassailable 'truth' videos or papers; nothing is unassailable but as a rabbit in the lion's den, I won't be so foolish as to even try and suggest quality materials.

MM

[beachnut]

You're obviously right beachnut the whole Truth Movement hasn't a leg to stand on. It's truly unfortunate that they didn't encounter your complete and unequivocal knowledge about the subject from the outset.

I'll be sure to get the word out and I'm sure they'll all be gone by tomorrow.

MM

Still no facts to prove you explosives planted in fake offices by fake people making no noise exploding like real RDX would but without the sound. Where did you find this explosive stuff? No thermite cutting devices found. No evidence you just have faith like a religion of truth with no facts?

What facts will you tell us LC has? Fetzer has none. What is your favorite expert in the truth movement?

Show me a fact and put me out of my poor training as a pilot and engineer that lets me figure out 9/11 without help from liars.

When did they plant all these explosives they did not need since the gravity collapse is enough and the only energy responsible for the destruction at the WTC. (impacts and extra fuel included)

Did you know the energy of just the fuel was 315 tons of TNT in energy, in each jet! That was the biggest fuel air explosion I have ever seen.

Facts are not found in the truth movement to prove the CT you support. Prove me wrong. You just make up stuff.

I bet you say they put it in the elevator shafts. How much? Or in the offices near the core. How much did they put there? I bet you think fake companies were set up to do it. Which companies were they? That would be public record!

Since you know it was a CT what facts do you have we have never seen which make you right? (LC has none, do you?)

[R.Mackey]

I stand corrected. I am not prepared to detail any proof that Mark Roberts has ever made a factual error in any of his works.

His bias and conclusions on the other hand are another thing.
Thank you, that's almost good enough.

If his facts are accurate, then his bias is irrelevant, and his conclusions correct, wouldn't you agree?

Now do you understand why we're more interested in facts?

[Gravy]

MM, you may be mistaking me (Mark Roberts) for MarkyX, who made the Screw Loose Change and 9/11 Deniers Speak videos. I haven't made any videos. Until today, that is, and I'll have that up on Google shortly.

Bias? When I examine a purported documentary about an important event that claims to tell the "truth" about 9/11, and gets every single claim wrong, and contains 81 errors of fact and a greater number of misleading statements, logical fallacies, misuse of images and quotes, etc., you're damn right I'm going to be biased against the people who created such trash...and who refused to correct their errors when asked to do so, but instead call their critics traitors.

Yup. I'm biased against people who lie about 9/11. That's serious. It matters.

[Miragememories]

(bolding mine)

Finally something specific.

Are you suggesting that the central core was packed with molten lava, and then erupted like a volcano via remote control?

Is the bold not working on your computer ComspiRaider?

I believe my words were volcanic "like".

Ya you got me. I'm suggesting my beliefs are based on the idea that conspirators triggered a volcano under both WTC towers. What a novel idea. That might make a great movie of the week.

MM

[Gravy]

Hey don't get me wrong. I'm not saying his points aren't targeting errors. I'm saying the audience outside of JREF is going to wonder why he's bothering and are likely gonna be put to sleep by the process.I don't claim that my docs are exciting. I do get emails every single week from people who were taken in by the lies in Loose Change and other videos, and who came to think more critically after reading my stuff.

[johnny karate]

Well johnny karate, why am I not surprised to find you here.Ironically enough, it was through the LC forum that I found this one, and my subsequent banning that led me to register here. I think you'll find a lot of skeptics ended up here that way.

I do miss our frustrating discussions in the LC Forums and I posted that your banning was regretable though not surprising. I'd be curious to know why you found my banning "not surprising". I was always careful to obey the forum rules. Furthermore, I'd be curious to how you feel about that fact that skeptics are routinely banned for no apparent reason while CTers like Roxdog blatantly and consistently engage in against the rules behavior with impunity. I'm not suggesting you are in any way affiliated with the LC admins, but I just wonder how you feel this clearly hypocritical policy reflects on the people that represent the movement you came here to defend.

Yes God knows I'm well aware that anything I say has to be expert qualified and peer-reviewed before you will grace it with the least bit of consideration.

With that in mind, I suspect you and I will have little meaningful dialogue as I've pretty well said all I can to you on that subject.I think you'll see (and perhaps have already seen in this very thread) that I am not alone in my standards of evidence. Most people here feel the same way.

Thank you for the welcome though.You're welcome for the welcome!

[GlennB]

I stand corrected. I am not prepared to detail any proof that Mark Roberts has ever made a factual error in any of his works.

His bias and conclusions on the other hand are another thing.

MM

Well, this is disappointing MM.

In all your posts, so far, you haven't made one single substantive comment.
Not one fact.
Zip.
Just word games.

Here's a challenge - make a statement about 9/11 that differs from the OT. Then let's discuss that statement.

You up for it?

[Miragememories]

That wasn't what you said. You said, and I quote,


I asked you to back that up. You still have not. Now please, either do so or issue a proper retraction.


They do nothing of the kind. You have seen, I am sure, plenty of expositions in text of the errors contained in "Loose Change". My statement is based upon that analysis, not personal prejudice or lack of objectivity.

As before, you are equivocating. Now, again, please back up your statements with evidence, or retract them. If you can show me how "Loose Change" is not fiction, or how the myriad errors we have found do not damage its thesis, then we will reconsider our opinion. But we will not do so on the basis of your prejudice.

I'm sorry R.Mackey I didn't see anywhere that I applied the word "error" to my comments about those works. I did say something to the effect of nothing being 100% errorfree but I didn't identify any specific errors that I need to retract.

I'd also like to clarify that I have no special allegiance to the LC film/video just because I am a member there.

It wasn't the documentary that significantly influenced my current beliefs.

Dave von Kleist's IN PLANE SITE got me thinking differently initially.

And yes I know it has errors as well.

I honestly hope the final release of LC eliminates all the errors and misconceptions of it's predecessors.

Regarding personal prejudice, well of course I do. Who doesn't? I still try and maintain an open mind though.

For the most part, I have said nothing other than personal opinion and since my opinions are subjective I see no reason to retract them.



MM

[R.Mackey]

For the most part, I have said nothing other than personal opinion and since my opinions are subjective I see no reason to retract them.
It's not that your opinions are subjective. It's that they are accusatory, and apparently you can't back them up.

That's why you need to retract them.

[Dog Town]

This is from George H @LC, on his thread, "How many "movies" have you handed out..."
http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=2826

I love this...
100+ and counting.

half have been LC.

Response has been nothing.


Worst was X-mas. Went home to all my college friends. Handed out two dozen discs. And these are my friends mind you. And the response has been deafening silence. Worrisome.

*cocks head to side* "Really" ???????????????????????????

Priceless!

[Miragememories]

MM, you may be mistaking me (Mark Roberts) for MarkyX, who made the Screw Loose Change and 9/11 Deniers Speak videos. I haven't made any videos. Until today, that is, and I'll have that up on Google shortly.

Bias? When I examine a purported documentary about an important event that claims to tell the "truth" about 9/11, and gets every single claim wrong, and contains 81 errors of fact and a greater number of misleading statements, logical fallacies, misuse of images and quotes, etc., you're damn right I'm going to be biased against the people who created such trash...and who refused to correct their errors when asked to do so, but instead call their critics traitors.

Yup. I'm biased against people who lie about 9/11. That's serious. It matters.

I apologize Mark err Gravy. I'm not sure where I went off the track in the mistaken belief that "Screw Loose Change" was your creation.

My comments about your bias were meant in the context of how they effected your audience outside of JREF. Here you are preaching to the converted and can do no wrong.

Bias as in 'tone' can undermine the point of a presentation. I'm not saying you aren't entitled to feel emotionally involved about your convictions but displaying them in text rather than a speech, to an audience that has yet to be persuaded, can be counter productive. That was my whole point. Feel free to be as openly hostile and as sarcastic as you wish in your public papers. I'm just giving you some honest useful feedback and I did the same with Dylan. At least you responded. I've never heard a peep from any of the LC administrators.

God I hope I don't get banned for saying that.

Like I said in an earlier post, I'm not particularly a devotee of the LC doc and while I have doubts about your error count, you'll have to wait until I have time to re-screen LC and compare it to your critique before I can respond further.

Oh and as a side note, I think your avatar creates the wrong impression. And yes I did see the whole video it was extracted from.

If it makes you feel any better, I don't like Dylan's avatar either.

MM

[The Doc]

The problem with 9/11 Conspiracy is the fact that, at first glance, it is very intriguing.

To believe the Conspiracy you can watch a 1hr 30min movie that will tell you an incorrect version of the official story (straw man) and then debate this "official story" showing several "facts" that are easily debatable and false.

To actually find out the official story you have to read into the investigations done by the NIST, the 9/11 Commission and several independent papers. That's not exactly (for most people) intriguing. It involves reading, education and some degree of intelligence. Much harder than buying into the conspiracy.

[Gravy]

My comments about your bias were meant in the context of how they effected your audience outside of JREF. Here you are preaching to the converted and can do no wrong.The vast majority of people who view this subforum are lurking guests, not members. I don't assume that they're "converted" to any point of view.

Bias as in 'tone' can undermine the point of a presentation. I'm not saying you aren't entitled to feel emotionally involved about your convictions but displaying them in text rather than a speech, to an audience that has yet to be persuaded, can be counter productive. That was my whole point. Feel free to be as openly hostile and as sarcastic as you wish in your public papers. I'm just giving you some honest useful feedback and I did the same with Dylan. At least you responded. I've never heard a peep from any of the LC administrators.I agree with you.

God I hope I don't get banned for saying that.Why would you get banned for that?

Like I said in an earlier post, I'm not particularly a devotee of the LC doc and while I have doubts about your error count, you'll have to wait until I have time to re-screen LC and compare it to your critique before I can respond further.If you're actually interested in such detail, I'll gladly give you my categorized error list, which references LC2E errors by transcript line number. I never finished my update to account for changes made in LC Final Cut. It was over 250 pages, with many more references, and I got bored with it. I expanded part of it into my WTC 7 paper. I wrote the original guide after only 3 weeks of learning about these issues, and I've learned much since.

Oh and as a side note, I think your avatar creates the wrong impression. And yes I did see the whole video it was extracted from.I think it's hilarious, and so do many other people. I'll be keeping it. Thank Oliver for that.

[kookbreaker]

My comments about your bias were meant in the context of how they effected your audience outside of JREF. Here you are preaching to the converted and can do no wrong.

I would beg to differ. I have seen many fence sitters change their tune after a reference to the reader's guide or screwloosechange.


Bias as in 'tone' can undermine the point of a presentation. I'm not saying you aren't entitled to feel emotionally involved about your convictions but displaying them in text rather than a speech, to an audience that has yet to be persuaded, can be counter productive.


Again, I beg to differ. If one maintains a completely neutral tone in one's writing the reader may not quite catch the difference between a minor error, a major error, or a deliberate lie. Such distinctions are important.

To date, the only folks I have seen make a comment about Gravy's paper's 'tone' are those strongly inclined towards conspiracy belief in the first place and not really a target audience. In this case, the complaint is little more than a 'You were right, but I didn't like the way you said it!'. Its an intellectual cop-out, and used as an excuse to evade the responsibility of viewing an article for its content.


That was my whole point. Feel free to be as openly hostile and as sarcastic as you wish in your public papers.


This contradicts what you just said! :confused:

[Miragememories]

Well, this is disappointing MM.

In all your posts, so far, you haven't made one single substantive comment.
Not one fact.
Zip.
Just word games.

Here's a challenge - make a statement about 9/11 that differs from the OT. Then let's discuss that statement.

You up for it?

Sorry to disappoint you GlennB.

From what I've seen, the majority of the posts by everyone here are of a non-factual nature. I wasn't aware that I was obliged to be different.

Like I said earlier, I lurked here for quite some time before joining. It would be no problem for me to climb back into the lurking closet if my visible presence is proving to be unpleasant for the 'rank 'n file' membership.

Regarding your challenge for me to make a statement that differs from the Official Story, I honestly fail to see any point.

I know just about everything about 9/11 has been argued here ad nauseum.

I've seen firsthand the piranha-like feeding frenzy that occurs here when someone attempts any dialogue that brands them as a CTer.

I think I'll live with the fact that most of you already see me as another CT a**hole without bothering to subject myself to the inevitable ridicule.

MM

[Miragememories]

It's not that your opinions are subjective. It's that they are accusatory, and apparently you can't back them up.

That's why you need to retract them.

That's too funny R.Mackey, I'm glad to see you have a sense of humour.

If everyone here retracted their accusatory statements this forum would be gutted.

MM

[A W Smith]

.I think I'll live with the fact that most of you already see me as another CT a**hole

Well at least we agree on something.

[beachnut]

MM is a religious CTer; faith based CTer; no facts required; just opinions.

Like LC.

[R.Mackey]

That's too funny R.Mackey, I'm glad to see you have a sense of humour.

If everyone here retracted their accusatory statements this forum would be gutted.
I'm not laughing.

You made several derogatory statements, one directed at a forum member's character and accusing him of being "by no means squeaky clean," and have resisted all requests to back them up. Why do you behave like this?

Where I come from, you don't accuse someone else of perfidy without being prepared to back it up. I am quite prepared to back up what I said about "Loose Change." You display a completely different regard for others.

Frankly, this is in fact consistent with many, but not all, other conspiracy theorists. You disappoint us all.

[Miragememories]

The problem with 9/11 Conspiracy is the fact that, at first glance, it is very intriguing.

To believe the Conspiracy you can watch a 1hr 30min movie that will tell you an incorrect version of the official story (straw man) and then debate this "official story" showing several "facts" that are easily debatable and false.

To actually find out the official story you have to read into the investigations done by the NIST, the 9/11 Commission and several independent papers. That's not exactly (for most people) intriguing. It involves reading, education and some degree of intelligence. Much harder than buying into the conspiracy.

I agree The Doc.

For that reason I have read numerous books, many papers 'pro and con' and have seen a multitude of documentaries.

I'm not inclined to believe all the the well presented arguments I've seen are 'hogwash'. Feel free to trash the lazy badly researched ones.

I do think the skeptics do an excellent job of raising the point that there are a lot of questions that so-called CTers can't answer or don't answer satisfactorily.

My hope is that someday a proper unrestricted investigation will be launched that will finally put the 9/11 issue to bed.

For the record, I dearly hope that the Official Story is the legitimate one!

MM

[The Doc]

I agree The Doc.

For that reason I have read numerous books, many papers 'pro and con' and have seen a multitude of documentaries.

I'm not inclined to believe all the the well presented arguments I've seen are 'hogwash'. Feel free to trash the lazy badly researched ones.

I do think the skeptics do an excellent job of raising the point that there are a lot of questions that so-called CTers can't answer or don't answer satisfactorily.

My hope is that someday a proper unrestricted investigation will be launched that will finally put the 9/11 issue to bed.

For the record, I dearly hope that the Official Story is the legitimate one!

MM

Question.

Have you read the NIST report? Have you read the 9/11 Commission report?

[Miragememories]

The vast majority of people who view this subforum are lurking guests, not members. I don't assume that they're "converted" to any point of view.

I agree with you.

Why would you get banned for that?


If you're actually interested in such detail, I'll gladly give you my categorized error list, which references LC2E errors by transcript line number. I never finished my update to account for changes made in LC Final Cut. It was over 250 pages, with many more references, and I got bored with it. I expanded part of it into my WTC 7 paper. I wrote the original guide after only 3 weeks of learning about these issues, and I've learned much since.

I think it's hilarious, and so do many other people. I'll be keeping it. Thank Oliver for that.

I meant banned at LC. I'm not certain where all the lines in the sand are.

Thanks for the offer on details but I'm so swamped with work and a backlog of reading that I honestly wouldn't be able to read it soon. I do understand how exhausting..and boring that much work can be.

MM

[Miragememories]

I would beg to differ. I have seen many fence sitters change their tune after a reference to the reader's guide or screwloosechange.



Again, I beg to differ. If one maintains a completely neutral tone in one's writing the reader may not quite catch the difference between a minor error, a major error, or a deliberate lie. Such distinctions are important.

To date, the only folks I have seen make a comment about Gravy's paper's 'tone' are those strongly inclined towards conspiracy belief in the first place and not really a target audience. In this case, the complaint is little more than a 'You were right, but I didn't like the way you said it!'. Its an intellectual cop-out, and used as an excuse to evade the responsibility of viewing an article for its content.



This contradicts what you just said! :confused:

I never said it had to be or should be neutral, kookbreaker.

There's a big difference between biased and colorful. It's all a question of style and effective presentation.

Neutral is fine if your goal is to put your audience to sleep or the factual information is so exciting it speaks for itself.

It's rather naive of you to believe content alone conveys the message we derive from reading.

MM

[Miragememories]

Question.

Have you read the NIST report? Have you read the 9/11 Commission report?

I have studied both reports.

No I have not read them both from beginning to end.

I suspect few here have.

MM

[The Doc]

I have studied both reports.

No I have not read them both from beginning to end.

I suspect few here have.

MM

Where did you study the reports?

The reason I am asking is because I feel that most CT'ers are arguing against us for the sake of arguing. They've made it "us vs them" instead of trying to disprove the official story.

I, myself, have read the entire commission report and I've been reading the NIST report for about 2 months now. Hard to find time though.

[Miragememories]

I'm not laughing.

You made several derogatory statements, one directed at a forum member's character and accusing him of being "by no means squeaky clean," and have resisted all requests to back them up. Why do you behave like this?

Where I come from, you don't accuse someone else of perfidy without being prepared to back it up. I am quite prepared to back up what I said about "Loose Change." You display a completely different regard for others.

Frankly, this is in fact consistent with many, but not all, other conspiracy theorists. You disappoint us all.

I acused no one of treachery R.Mackey.

If it makes you feel better, I'll say as far as I know Mark is squeaky clean.

It wasn't meant as a slur but a universal observation that no one is perfect.

My comment wasn't directed at his character either. I have no reason to believe that Mark is anything but honourable and dedicated to his beliefs.
I'm sure he's quite capable of defending himself if he feels his character is being maligned and doesn't need you to rise to his defence.

MM

[stateofgrace]

Hi MM,

I am sorry to barge into your argument and your defence of LC but could you give me you opinion on this?

http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Ch...showtopic=2114 (http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=2114)

Maybe you could clarify exactly what you think happened to the passengers and crew of the flights.

Do you agree with this?

They were vaporized when the plane was hit a point blank range by an A10 Thunderbolt. I suspect the plane was also hit at altitude. At this point, I don't know what its actual flight path would have been. There was debris spread over a twelve mile stretch, but it was in the opposite direction from which we are tole the plane was flying. My guess is the plane was intended for WTC7, but they lost the window and decided to ditch it.



or this ?


I think they were experiments for what we are going to be going through later.

I think they were used for biometrics, scanning, used to see how far they could be tourtured, I think they were treated worse then they jews were treated in the concentration camps during WW2. I believe thats coming again for all the world. And they were used as experiments for some time.



or maybe this ?

The intelligence agencies, realizing that 1/4 of their plan had been foiled, ordered the plane shot down to kill off the potential witnesses.

or this ?

I just don't believe the plane was shot down or secretly diverted to another airport where the government intercepted the plane and passengers and experimented on them before killing them and melting down the plane

Or can you possibliy imagine how offensive your forum is ?

[beachnut]

You're obviously right beachnut the whole Truth Movement hasn't a leg to stand on. It's truly unfortunate that they didn't encounter your complete and unequivocal knowledge about the subject from the outset.

I'll be sure to get the word out and I'm sure they'll all be gone by tomorrow.

MM

Yes you are right! LC has been wrong before they started. Wrong as Dylan speaks. I see you think opinions work in the real world as theories; they have; gee they burned witches. Guess if LC was running the world the inner circle in the secret "ready room" would have me burnt. I should not have taken those physics courses.

My goodness your opinion is someone set explosives in the WTC. No proof just opinions. You are just like LC videos. Simple lies.

LC is a collection of lies.

How can I put it easy to you. LC deceives and give wrong impressions; they tell lies.

LC present false information and intend to deceive; they tell lies.

Your opinions mean someone had to do the planting of explosives; if you have no proof you are deceiving and that makes you a liar.

Simple and easy for me; what do you think? Does LC have any facts; all I can find is lies. When you take LC videos as a whole they are just a lie; just like the rest of the truth movement.

Have you finished spreading the word? Or have you found a fact?

[R.Mackey]

I acused no one of treachery R.Mackey.

If it makes you feel better, I'll say as far as I know Mark is squeaky clean.

It wasn't meant as a slur but a universal observation that no one is perfect.

My comment wasn't directed at his character either. I have no reason to believe that Mark is anything but honourable and dedicated to his beliefs.
I'm sure he's quite capable of defending himself if he feels his character is being maligned and doesn't need you to rise to his defence.
Fine. Thank you for retracting your earlier statement.

Nonetheless, I would have been much more interested if you had some reason to have made the statement in the first place, much as how I asked you, with the very first post in which I addressed you, if there was any factual basis behind your insistence that "Loose Change" was not a work of fiction.

It seems clear at this point that the answer is "no." But please correct me if I misread your evasions.

Unfortunately, if you don't have any facts to bring to the table, then I will lose interest completely. I'm not swayed by unsupported arguments. I keep hoping that the entire Trooth Movement has some actual basis behind it, and that we merely have yet to meet anyone who understands it, but I grow less and less optimistic about this outcome with each Troother we meet.

[Ripley Twenty-Nine]

OK, I am amazed.

I am not an active member of the Conspiracy Theories sub forum here. I saw a thread talking about how JREF members were being banned without even trying to stir up trouble. I took this as a challenge, because I certainly wasn't looking for trouble with them. I'm more interested in finding out how they think, and why they think what they do, then trying to debunk everything that they promote. I wanted to show that a rational, fairly neutral party could post on the Loose Change forum without getting banned.

I got 6 posts in, all in the 'Skeptics' subforum, and I was banned. The most ironic thing is that 5 of my 6 posts were in a thread talking about how skeptics were not objective. I've read over my posts, and I have absolutely no idea what I said to get me banned; I really wasn't trying to stir anything up. When I logged in, and saw that I couldn't post any more, I actually E-Mailed Dylan assuming that a mistake had been made. It doesn't look like it was a mistake.

So, anyways, I guess what I'm trying to say is: Where's my badge? :)

[beachnut]

OK, I am amazed.

I am not an active member of the Conspiracy Theories sub forum here. I saw a thread talking about how JREF members were being banned without even trying to stir up trouble. I took this as a challenge, because I certainly wasn't looking for trouble with them. I'm more interested in finding out how they think, and why they think what they do, then trying to debunk everything that they promote. I wanted to show that a rational, fairly neutral party could post on the Loose Change forum without getting banned.

I got 6 posts in, all in the 'Skeptics' subforum, and I was banned. The most ironic thing is that 5 of my 6 posts were in a thread talking about how skeptics were not objective. I've read over my posts, and I have absolutely no idea what I said to get me banned; I really wasn't trying to stir anything up. When I logged in, and saw that I couldn't post any more, I actually E-Mailed Dylan assuming that a mistake had been made. It doesn't look like it was a mistake.

So, anyways, I guess what I'm trying to say is: Where's my badge? :)

Maybe you write too well and they resent it. LC is exactly like what they are against.

[beachnut]

OK, I am amazed.

I got 6 posts in, all in the 'Skeptics' subforum, and I was banned. The most ironic thing is that 5 of my 6 posts were in a thread talking about how skeptics were not objective. I've read over my posts, and I have absolutely no idea what I said to get me banned; I really wasn't trying to stir anything up. When I logged in, and saw that I couldn't post any more, I actually E-Mailed Dylan assuming that a mistake had been made. It doesn't look like it was a mistake.

So, anyways, I guess what I'm trying to say is: Where's my badge? :)

Only 65 percent of LC posters believe we made it to the Moon. The one says it is technically impossible. I hate to say it but for most at LC it is technically impossible for them to land a man on the moon. But for engineers and scientist it is possible, and we did it.

Education is needed and it is not easy to become an engineer; you have to study and cut down your weed use some. And opinions will not work when you need orbital mechanics.

[WildCat]

For that reason I have read numerous books, many papers 'pro and con' and have seen a multitude of documentaries.

I'm not inclined to believe all the the well presented arguments I've seen are 'hogwash'.
Do you have an example of one single argument for the CT that isn't "hogwash"? I'm guessing not, as you've had ample opportunity to make one single post here supporting the CT and have yet to do so.

Conversely, have you read anything in the 9/11 Commission report or any of the NIST reports that you feel is "hogwash"?

[T.A.M.]

Mirage:

If you get a chance, please take my quiz for truthers and CTists. It is in a link within the subforum. You will find it under "Multiple Choice Quiz for CTists and Truthers", or something to that effect. You can post your answers at the end of the quiz thread, so we can all see where you stand on many of the CT issues around 9/11

Thanks and welcome to the Forum.

TAM:)

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

My US$0.02


Also Known as: Golden Mean Fallacy, Fallacy of Moderation Description of Middle Ground


This fallacy is committed when it is assumed that the middle position between two extremes must be correct simply because it is the middle position. this sort of "reasoning" has the following form:
Position A and B are two extreme positions.
C is a position that rests in the middle between A and B.
Therefore C is the correct position.
This line of "reasoning" is fallacious because it does not follow that a position is correct just because it lies in the middle of two extremes. This is shown by the following example. Suppose that a person is selling his computer. He wants to sell it for the current market value, which is $800 and someone offers him $1 for it. It would hardly follow that $400.50 is the proper price.
This fallacy draws its power from the fact that a moderate or middle position is often the correct one. For example, a moderate amount of exercise is better than too much exercise or too little exercise. However, this is not simply because it lies in the middle ground between two extremes. It is because too much exercise is harmful and too little exercise is all but useless. The basic idea behind many cases in which moderation is correct is that the extremes are typically "too much" and "not enough" and the middle position is "enough." In such cases the middle position is correct almost by definition.
It should be kept in mind that while uncritically assuming that the middle position must be correct because it is the middle position is poor reasoning it does not follow that accepting a middle position is always fallacious. As was just mentioned, many times a moderate position is correct. However, the claim that the moderate or middle position is correct must be supported by legitimate reasoning. Examples of Middle Ground


Some people claim that God is all powerful, all knowing, and all good. Other people claim that God does not exist at all. Now, it seems reasonable to accept a position somewhere in the middle. So, it is likely that God exists, but that he is only very powerful, very knowing, and very good. That seems right to me.
Congressman Jones has proposed cutting welfare payments by 50% while Congresswoman Shender has proposed increasing welfare payments by 10% to keep up with inflation and cost of living increases. I think that the best proposal is the one made by Congressman Trumple. He says that a 30% decrease in welfare payments is a good middle ground, so I think that is what we should support.
A month ago, a tree in Bill's yard was damaged in a storm. His neighbor, Joe, asked him to have the tree cut down so it would not fall on Joes new shed. Bill refused to do this. Two days ago another storm blew the tree onto Joe's new shed. Joe demanded that Joe pay the cost of repairs, which was $250. Bill said that he wasn't going to pay a cent. Obviously, the best solution is to reach a compromise between the two extremes, so Bill should pay Joe $125 dollars. http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/middle-ground.html

[ConspiRaider]

Is the bold not working on your computer ComspiRaider?

I believe my words were volcanic "like".

Ya you got me. I'm suggesting my beliefs are based on the idea that conspirators triggered a volcano under both WTC towers. What a novel idea. That might make a great movie of the week.

MM
You're stunting. You think quite highly of yourself. And, you're spending way too much time explaining why you do not wish to discuss anything. Dancing like crazy. Very high probability, in my opinion, you've been here before under a different name. Exceedingly high probability.

On the off-chance that you wish to discuss something specific:

You described a "volcano like explosion" in the inner core of WTC1. Was that the trigger for the collapse? And if so: How do you explain the fact that the WTC1 inner core stood, briefly, AFTER the outer core and floors had already collapsed?

[~enigma~]

I think it's hilarious, and so do many other people. I'll be keeping it. Thank Oliver for that.
It is hilarious to see the catatonia of Dylan. I guess your hex-fu is strong padawan Roberts.

[Miragememories]

Hi MM,

I am sorry to barge into your argument and your defence of LC but could you give me you opinion on this?

http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Ch...showtopic=2114 (http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=2114)

Maybe you could clarify exactly what you think happened to the passengers and crew of the flights.

Do you agree with this?


or this ?



or maybe this ?



or this ?



Or can you possibliy imagine how offensive your forum is ?

I'm sorry stateofgrace, I'm not privy to that information.

God knows why you think I could answer that question?

I hang out at the LC forums because of the subject being discussed, not because I'm a devotee of the documentary.

Too many at JREF make the mistake of painting every person who questions them with the same brush.

MM

[Miragememories]

You're stunting. You think quite highly of yourself. And, you're spending way too much time explaining why you do not wish to discuss anything. Dancing like crazy. Very high probability, in my opinion, you've been here before under a different name. Exceedingly high probability.

On the off-chance that you wish to discuss something specific:

You described a "volcano like explosion" in the inner core of WTC1. Was that the trigger for the collapse? And if so: How do you explain the fact that the WTC1 inner core stood, briefly, AFTER the outer core and floors had already collapsed?

Well ConspiRaider with you around to read my mind I won't need to bother posting at all.

"Stunting" that's a new one for me. I consider myself to be just another regular human being trying to survive in a world gone mad. I'm not dancing like crazy, though I would love to be able to tango.

No, I've never been here by any other name but you're free to believe whatever you wish of course.

Regarding my use of the description; "volcano-like explosion" for WTC 1 and 2, somehow "splat" didn't quite "cut it".

What was the trigger? Well my best guess, is a radio signal using digital encryption to avoid 'false triggering'. I have no idea why a small portion of the core briefly stood before collapsing, we live in an imperfect world.

MM

[uk_dave]

I hang out at the LC forums because of the subject being discussed, not because I'm a devotee of the documentary.

And yet you post this over at the LC thread where all the truthers are getting...erm.... excited over loose change being no. 1 on google...or number 13...or something....

The lamps will be burning late at JREF tonight!

MM

http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=2853

hmmmmmmmmmm

Why would you think the members of this forum will be kept up tonight just because loose change (you know, the one with all the ...... ummmm... mistakes in it) is riding high in the google hit parade?

[Miragememories]

Do you have an example of one single argument for the CT that isn't "hogwash"? I'm guessing not, as you've had ample opportunity to make one single post here supporting the CT and have yet to do so.

Conversely, have you read anything in the 9/11 Commission report or any of the NIST reports that you feel is "hogwash"?

Well Wildcat, I don't feel like presenting CT cases without time to prepare my presentation. I'd hate to bore everyone with the same old material and force you to cut and paste the same old responses.

Regarding the 9/11 Commission, in a nutshell I feel it was crippled from the getgo. Bush didn't want it, he resisted it's creation, it was restricted in what it could do and it wasn't comprised of impartial investigators.

While I'm impressed by how many trees NIST managed to kill with their 10,000 page report, I won't call their efforts hogwash but I am disappointed with how they base the crux of their WTC collapse beliefs on a questionable computer simulation.

MM

[The Almond]

While I'm impressed by how many trees NIST managed to kill with their 10,000 page report, I won't call their efforts hogwash but I am disappointed with how they base the crux of their WTC collapse beliefs on a questionable computer simulation.
MM

Had you read the report, you would find that NIST based much of their report on eyewitness testimonies, photographic and video evidence in addition to calculations, physical experiments, real-life simulations, stochastic calculations (that is, calculations based on the probability of an event occuring, rather than the assumption that one did) and yes, computer simulations.

Your casual dismissal of the NIST NCSTAR 1 report is indicative of someone who has spent no time reading or analyzing the report, but rather spends the time parroting the lies and poor reasoning of other conspiracy theorists. Would you care to prove me wrong?

[stateofgrace]

I'm sorry stateofgrace, I'm not privy to that information.

God knows why you think I could answer that question?

I hang out at the LC forums because of the subject being discussed, not because I'm a devotee of the documentary.

Too many at JREF make the mistake of painting every person who questions them with the same brush.

MM

You are correct painting people with the same brush is unfair and not nice. Equally so painting everybody here as sheep and shills who simply believe everything they are told is unfair.

I do not post on LC, mainly because I am banned but when I get bored I have look at some of the threads that are discussed on this forum and the way anybody who objects the truther line is treated. This thread is one of many that come across as highly offensive and like you rightly point out, the truth movement has no answers to this question. These questions should not need to be asked, let alone be answered by absurd and ridiculous theories. There were real people onboard these planes, real people inside the Towers and real people inside the Pentagon. On September 11th 2001 they were subject to the most appalling thing imaginable. They were murdered in the most brutal and callous manner possible. The last moments of their lives was captured on live TV and broadcast to a stunned world.

LC has no right to involve themselves in these event, they have no right to further prolong the suffering of those that these unfortunate people left behind. Yet they do, this forum spews nothing short of obscenities onto the net. Fake investigators, pretend scientists and teenagers who think it is cool and hip all join in to promote themselves and their theories. They do so without a care of the continued hurt or suffering they possibly cause. They hide behind their banner of thruthseekers and freedom fighters and pretend that it ok to voice opinions like this and that everybody should listen to them.

I am sorry mm, but LC is an insult, an insult to those who died, those that have to live with their deaths and those who tried to help. Taking the moral high ground and trying to pretend that this film and the forum are just does not wash.

If I have wrongly painted you, then simply disprove me and state what you believe happened on 911, back it up with fact and evidence. You have the opportunity right now to set the record straight and present something that has not been debunked over and over again. If you cannot, then fine, maybe LC is the place for you.

[Arus808]

another LC troll who comes here with "big" fancy words but no substance.

[beachnut]

Well Wildcat, I don't feel like presenting CT cases without time to prepare my presentation. I'd hate to bore everyone with the same old material and force you to cut and paste the same old responses.

a questionable computer simulation.

MM

Prepare presentation for a CTer means the CTer has no facts and it will be done soon.

Soon for CTers means never.

Then most CTers throw out the same old thing they picked up from CT sites "questionable computer simulation".

Like the LC forum and most CTers there are no facts to use.

MM has no facts or evidence for his explosive theory on 9/11, just opinion that it happen. Where does a CTer come up with this stuff? How can they make it up with out facts? Who failed these guys in school for cause and effect and rational thought?

[ConspiRaider]

Well Wildcat, I don't feel like presenting CT cases without time to prepare my presentation. I'd hate to bore everyone with the same old material and force you to cut and paste the same old responses.

Regarding the 9/11 Commission, in a nutshell I feel it was crippled from the getgo. Bush didn't want it, he resisted it's creation, it was restricted in what it could do and it wasn't comprised of impartial investigators.

While I'm impressed by how many trees NIST managed to kill with their 10,000 page report, I won't call their efforts hogwash but I am disappointed with how they base the crux of their WTC collapse beliefs on a questionable computer simulation.

MM
You're already boring everyone with your tired tactic of bolding the name of the person to whom you are responding. No one does that because no one needs to. A complete waste of time, since quoting already handles that chore transparently. Therefore, you are doing this in a feeble attempt to convince us that this is your unique style. When in all likelihood, it's sleight of hand - a stunt. You're trying to convince us that you haven't been here before under a different name (or names).

And you are continuing your little game of making very general statements without really saying anything at all. To amuse yourself, and your perceived audience at another message board. CTs - lacking a sense of humor - have to resort to these types of tactics for "amusement".

[Miragememories]

And yet you post this over at the LC thread where all the truthers are getting...erm.... excited over loose change being no. 1 on google...or number 13...or something....



http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=2853

hmmmmmmmmmm

Why would you think the members of this forum will be kept up tonight just because loose change (you know, the one with all the ...... ummmm... mistakes in it) is riding high in the google hit parade?

Well uk_dave because of threads like this one which are totally obsessed with the 'goings-on' of another site.

My comment was just an expression of how interested JREF members appeared to be in the Loose Change.

MM

[uk_dave]

Really?

Can't say I've seen anyone mention the google rating here except for the post I made with your comment.

Wrong yet again.

[Arus808]

wow, you just missed the entire post/reply by Gravy as to why we are "interested" in Loose Change and the site/forums. Typically, its used as entertainment by us, as an exemplary example of those who act hypocritically.

[Miragememories]

Had you read the report, you would find that NIST based much of their report on eyewitness testimonies, photographic and video evidence in addition to calculations, physical experiments, real-life simulations, stochastic calculations (that is, calculations based on the probability of an event occuring, rather than the assumption that one did) and yes, computer simulations.

Your casual dismissal of the NIST NCSTAR 1 report is indicative of someone who has spent no time reading or analyzing the report, but rather spends the time parroting the lies and poor reasoning of other conspiracy theorists. Would you care to prove me wrong?

Almond, Have you read all 10,000 pages of the NIST Report? Are you not "parroting" your response based on what you've gleaned from second hand observations about the report?

What make's you so qualified to say my reply was "casual"?

You haven't any information whatsoever to back up your claim that I have spent no time studying the NIST 9/11 Report.

I suggest you be sure of your facts before you start behaving the way you accuse CTers of behaving!

MM

[Arus808]

well, your reply is casual by your non-substance responses, and you've yet to answer any questions directly posted to you.

What do you think happened on 9/11

Please provide evidence, facts and any investigations you've done personally to back up your claims.

[GlennB]

I'm sorry stateofgrace, I'm not privy to that information.

God knows why you think I could answer that question?

I hang out at the LC forums because of the subject being discussed, not because I'm a devotee of the documentary.

Too many at JREF make the mistake of painting every person who questions them with the same brush.

MM

Have you watched Loose Change?
Do you believe it contains errors?
If so, what are the errors you're aware of?

For example : you might disbelieve the claim that Flight 93 didn't crash at Shanksville.

Actually, let's start with that right there. Do you believe Flight 93 crashed at Shanksville, killing all on board?

Answer required.

[~enigma~]

Why is it when I see woowoos here asking the same tired question I am reminded of Proverbs 26:11?

[Miragememories]

You are correct painting people with the same brush is unfair and not nice. Equally so painting everybody here as sheep and shills who simply believe everything they are told is unfair.

I do not post on LC, mainly because I am banned but when I get bored I have look at some of the threads that are discussed on this forum and the way anybody who objects the truther line is treated. This thread is one of many that come across as highly offensive and like you rightly point out, the truth movement has no answers to this question. These questions should not need to be asked, let alone be answered by absurd and ridiculous theories. There were real people onboard these planes, real people inside the Towers and real people inside the Pentagon. On September 11th 2001 they were subject to the most appalling thing imaginable. They were murdered in the most brutal and callous manner possible. The last moments of their lives was captured on live TV and broadcast to a stunned world.

LC has no right to involve themselves in these event, they have no right to further prolong the suffering of those that these unfortunate people left behind. Yet they do, this forum spews nothing short of obscenities onto the net. Fake investigators, pretend scientists and teenagers who think it is cool and hip all join in to promote themselves and their theories. They do so without a care of the continued hurt or suffering they possibly cause. They hide behind their banner of thruthseekers and freedom fighters and pretend that it ok to voice opinions like this and that everybody should listen to them.

I am sorry mm, but LC is an insult, an insult to those who died, those that have to live with their deaths and those who tried to help. Taking the moral high ground and trying to pretend that this film and the forum are just does not wash.

If I have wrongly painted you, then simply disprove me and state what you believe happened on 911, back it up with fact and evidence. You have the opportunity right now to set the record straight and present something that has not been debunked over and over again. If you cannot, then fine, maybe LC is the place for you.

Well stateofgrace, at least we start out in agreement.

I judge people here based on their words and not by the fact that they are members of JREF. People who are members of LC should be judged similarly.

Many comments made here only serve to undermine the credibility of the person making them. Not all the theories postulated in the LC Forums are "absurd and ridiculous". Granted, some are but that's inevitable when you have unfiltered posting. I have seen many posts on JREF that are speculative when drawing conclusions about members of LC and show a clear lack of concern regarding validaty. Knowing the majority will likely join in the mockery as a source of amusement, many posters abuse LC members feeling quite free to say what they wish. I don't recall seeing any 'regular' non-troofer chastise a fellow member for unwarranted belligerence.

I am well aware of the carnage that took place on 9/11 and I don't need you to remind me of it!

You have no right to tell me, or anyone else, that I don't have the right to question the validity of the Official Story regarding the events of 9/11!

To make blanket statements about a large forum like LC just betrays your bigotry and total lack of balanced judgement!

To hide behind the losses of those who were sacrificed on 9/11 in order to justify your vitriolic feelings towards all members of LC is disgusting. The LC Forum is not the LC film. Many here are so blinded by their bigotry they fail to distinguish the difference.

I am a member of LC because, to date, it's the best forum I've encountered to have a dialogue about the events of 9/11.

I make no secret about my belief that the Official Story is unbelievable for me.

The issues are too important to be buried because painful memories are awakened in the families of survivors.

MM

[ConspiRaider]

Why is it when I see woowoos here asking the same tired question I am reminded of Proverbs 26:11?
Good one. I must not have paid enough attention in catechism (and there is no truth to the rumor that I was thinking of girls instead). Anyway I had to look this one up.

Just to save time for the non-thumping bible thumpers amongst us:

"As a dog returneth to his vomit, so a fool returneth to his folly."

[~enigma~]

Good one. I must not have paid enough attention in catechism (and there is no truth to the rumor that I was thinking of girls instead). Anyway I had to look this one up.

Just to save time for the non-thumping bible thumpers amongst us:

"As a dog returneth to his vomit, so a fool returneth to his folly.":D

[stateofgrace]

Well stateofgrace, at least we start out in agreement.

I judge people here based on their words and not by the fact that they are members of JREF. People who are members of LC should be judged similarly.

Many comments made here only serve to undermine the credibility of the person making them. Not all the theories postulated in the LC Forums are "absurd and ridiculous". Granted, some are but that's inevitable when you have unfiltered posting. I have seen many posts on JREF that are speculative when drawing conclusions about members of LC and show a clear lack of concern regarding validaty. Knowing the majority will likely join in the mockery as a source of amusement, many posters abuse LC members feeling quite free to say what they wish. I don't recall seeing any 'regular' non-troofer chastise a fellow member for unwarranted belligerence.

I am well aware of the carnage that took place on 9/11 and I don't need you to remind me of it!

You have no right to tell me, or anyone else, that I don't have the right to question the validity of the Official Story regarding the events of 9/11!

To make blanket statements about a large forum like LC just betrays your bigotry and total lack of balanced judgement!

To hide behind the losses of those who were sacrificed on 9/11 in order to justify your vitriolic feelings towards all members of LC is disgusting. The LC Forum is not the LC film. Many here are so blinded by their bigotry they fail to distinguish the difference.

I am a member of LC because, to date, it's the best forum I've encountered to have a dialogue about the events of 9/11.

I make no secret about my belief that the Official Story is unbelievable for me.

The issues are too important to be buried because painful memories are awakened in the families of survivors.

MM

And why should I not make blanket statements about this forum? Why should I listen to you?

Please save your fake outrage and snooty condemnation of me, my friend, for I am not your enemy, I am Joe Public, the guy you are trying to convince, remember?

So go ahead convince me, sell me your alternative theory. Prove you are not what I have accused you and the LC forum of. Offer it up, stop hiding behind words and offer up your thesis.

Save also you false accusation that I hide behind anybody let alone the victims of 911 and your accusations of bigotry. You have done nothing since you arrived here but spewed words, without any substance and without backing up anything. You will not receive a sympathetic hearing from me and I will continue to question you and anybody else that promotes BS. Doing so on LC may get you off but not here. Here you will be scrutinised, you will be subject to ridicule and you will be made to account for your theories. You would do well to remember your place, that being you are accusing innocent people of mass murder. This you do through choice, this is you prerogative, and it is you right. Equally so it is my right to call you out and another crackpot that does so. It is my right to reject you and your theories out of hand. This I do because after five years and all your rhetoric you have proved nothing, you have gained nothing.

You have been asked questions, which you have avoided. So I will ask you again. What happened on 911?

Prove me wrong; show how I am unable to make a balanced judgement. Shop hiding behind rhetoric and start putting up.

Show me why LC is justified and why it should be taken seriously, why I should not call people from there that spew obscene theories onto the net about the fate of the passengers idiots.

You are the truth seeker, you want the truth. This is incorrect; you neither seek the truth nor want it. You want to be the man, the hero who saved humanity from the nasty USG. This is the truthy dream. So put up.

Answer the question,what happened on 911?

[The Doc]

Nice posting stateofgrace :)

I think he should answer in this format (Thanks Orphina Nay):

Hello, my name is Miragememories. I joined this forum because I am interested in 9/11 conspiracy theories and I am skeptical of the "official version of events".

I learned about the "official version" by _____________________ [insert details as appropriate, such as "reading the NIST/FEMA/9/11 Commission Reports; reading prisonplanet.com; watching "Loose Change"; etc etc"].

The evidence that I have seen does not seem to add up to the story that says that 19 hijackers brought the world's most powerful country to its knees.

I am testing the theory that ______________________.

The strongest evidence towards this theory, in my opinion, is:

A) ___________________________ (Source: ______________)
B) ___________________________ (Source: ______________)
C) ___________________________ (Source: ______________)
etc.
[fill in the blanks with your choices, Miragememories.]

I wish to find out the truth, and if this evidence can be proved to be false or irrelevant, I will understand that I have been mistaken in thinking my theory and/or sources were correct.

Sincerely,
Miragememories.

[DavidJames]

Not all the theories postulated in the LC Forums are "absurd and ridiculous"...
I invite you to tell us one or two theories that you don't feel are "absurd and ridiculous". Tell us about them and show us the evidence which supports them.
edit: Use the from from Doc's post above this. Also when you are listing the evidence, try really hard to provide evidence in favor of your theory which does not involve conjecture, coincidences, cherry picked or misunderstood quotes.
I am a member of LC because, to date, it's the best forum I've encountered to have a dialogue about the events of 9/11. Most of the posters here have been banned from LC because they tried to have such a dialogue, not for rules violations.

I make no secret about my belief that the Official Story is unbelievable for me. Specifically, what do you find unbelievable and what research have you done to confirm you belief.

[The Almond]

Almond, Have you read all 10,000 pages of the NIST Report? Are you not "parroting" your response based on what you've gleaned from second hand observations about the report?

As a requirement for new employees at my firm, which designs highrises and skyscrapers, I was required to read the entirety of the NIST NCSTAR 1 report with appendices. It sits in my office to this day.

What make's you so qualified to say my reply was "casual"?

Your choice of words for dismissing the NIST report was based on a form of willful ignorance that has no basis in reality. It was neither a well formed, well expressed or factual opinion. Casual was indeed the correct characterization.

You haven't any information whatsoever to back up your claim that I have spent no time studying the NIST 9/11 Report.

Except that, had you actually read the report, you would not have made the erroneous statement that NIST based the majority of their conclusions on a simulation. This is false.

I suggest you be sure of your facts before you start behaving the way you accuse CTers of behaving!

What an excellent suggestion! Now that I am certain of my facts, perhaps you will actually read the NIST NCSTAR 1 report and be certain to get your facts straight.

[beachnut]

Not all the theories postulated in the LC Forums are "absurd and ridiculous".

I am a member of LC because, to date, it's the best forum I've encountered to have a dialogue about the events of 9/11.

I make no secret about my belief that the Official Story is unbelievable for me.

The issues are too important to be buried because painful memories are awakened in the families of survivors.

MM

Show me a theory postulated at the LC Forum that is not "absurd and ridiculous". Can you find any?

What part of 19 terrorist killing people is unbelievable?

When you make up stories without facts you are disrespectful to families of survivors. You are a simple Alex Jones liar and the lowest kind of person who would speak up without facts on something that is too important to lie about!

LC forum CTers are devoid of facts and disrespectful for those who died on 9/11. It is just that simple and most CTers are so blind they can not even see that simple fact.

Your veiled attempt at being the elite researcher on 9/11 has failed; you brought no facts just fictitious stories made up of lies (based on your posts all over the internet).

[R.Mackey]

As a requirement for new employees at my firm, which designs highrises and skyscrapers, I was required to read the entirety of the NIST NCSTAR 1 report with appendices. It sits in my office to this day.
Excellent. I suspect your example is not uncommon.

It pains me to see just how misguided the Deniers are in this respect -- we, the public, have unprecedented access to the methods and conclusions of this investigation. We should take full advantage of it. I suspect that, if an average high-school graduate bothered to read through the entire bulk of the NIST report, she couldn't possibly help gaining valuable insight into the process of engineering.

Disaster case-studies are marvellous training tools. After the Columbia accident, a copy of the Columbia Accident Investigation Board report was printed and handed to every single NASA employee -- engineers, network techs, managers, HR, you name it. It's crucially important that we all learn from our mistakes. Some mistakes are purely due to design, but many have contributing factors all across the organization.

So if you have any interest in what happened, whichever side of the fence you're on, give it a read. It's all right here (http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/), it won't cost you a dime. This is how things really work.

[The Almond]

Excellent. I suspect your example is not uncommon.

Not among good engineers and scientists, anyway. You're right about the NIST report being an excellent learning tool. Despite work experience, undergraduate and graduate training in structural design, I still learned an enormous amount from the NIST report. It's still true that engineers learn best from failure, not from success.

For anyone interested, the most recent, massive engineering failure (the levees in New Orleans) also has a report. It's only 129 pages long, but it, too is an excellent learning tool. The study was undertaken by UC Berkeley and the ASCE and it also sits on my desk as a valuable lesson in design and forecasting.

[Oliver]

*snip*I haven't made any videos. Until today, that is, and I'll have that up on Google shortly. *snip*

Huh? What did i miss? :confused:

[chipmunk stew]

Hopefully members here who have seen my posts in the LC forums accept that I'm only interested in the common good and attempt to engage in honest fair-minded dialogue whenever possible.
That's my impression of you.
Welcome! :w2:
Please keep in mind that the LC Forums, just like the JREF Forums allow anyone, regardless of age, education or experience to join. With such diverse memberships, you'll get quality and you'll get crap.
If you compare the administration styles of the two forums honestly, though, wouldn't you agree that this forum tends to attract and retain quality and discourage crap, while the LC forum does just the opposite?

[chipmunk stew]

I agree The Doc.

For that reason I have read numerous books, many papers 'pro and con' and have seen a multitude of documentaries.

I'm not inclined to believe all the the well presented arguments I've seen are 'hogwash'. Feel free to trash the lazy badly researched ones.
Which, specifically, do you consider well-presented and credible?
I do think the skeptics do an excellent job of raising the point that there are a lot of questions that so-called CTers can't answer or don't answer satisfactorily.

My hope is that someday a proper unrestricted investigation will be launched that will finally put the 9/11 issue to bed.
How would a "proper unrestricted investigation" look?

For the record, I dearly hope that the Official Story is the legitimate one!

MM
Perhaps there are some questions you have that we've examined here that you may be able to put to rest. In your view, what are the key points that cause you to doubt the "Official Story"?

[HyJinX]

More brilliance coming from the twoofies at LCF:

QUOTE (water_bender @ Jan 22 2007, 01:52 PM)i am of the opinion that violent resistance is the only thing that will enact any real change, and it seems that noone is willing to take it that far.

QUOTE From Ultimist
I am with you, water_bender. These people who think there is a peaceful solution to everything haven't taken the time to look at the real world or at history.

This kind of thing in the past has taken a REVOLUTION in order to fix. I firmly believe that a widescale violent revolt and the ousting of the current government BY FORCE is the only way we are going to solve the current level of corruption and disregard for human life. The US is turning into Nazi Germany, and lots of people don't even seem to care.

I care. Others should too, because they or the ones they love could be the victims of the next 9/11.

[~enigma~]

QUOTE (water_bender @ Jan 22 2007, 01:52 PM)i am of the opinion that violent resistance is the only thing that will enact any real change, and it seems that noone is willing to take it that far.

QUOTE From Ultimist
I am with you, water_bender. These people who think there is a peaceful solution to everything haven't taken the time to look at the real world or at history.

This kind of thing in the past has taken a REVOLUTION in order to fix. I firmly believe that a widescale violent revolt and the ousting of the current government BY FORCE is the only way we are going to solve the current level of corruption and disregard for human life. The US is turning into Nazi Germany, and lots of people don't even seem to care.Somebody should tell those lossers that as soon as they even hint at organizing an armed revolution and the government thinks there is any possibility of it being true, they are signing their own death warrents.

[HeyLeroy]

Nah. Let 'em figure it out the hard way.

[JimBenArm]

More brilliance coming from the twoofies at LCF:

QUOTE (water_bender @ Jan 22 2007, 01:52 PM)i am of the opinion that violent resistance is the only thing that will enact any real change, and it seems that noone is willing to take it that far.

QUOTE From Ultimist
I am with you, water_bender. These people who think there is a peaceful solution to everything haven't taken the time to look at the real world or at history.

This kind of thing in the past has taken a REVOLUTION in order to fix. I firmly believe that a widescale violent revolt and the ousting of the current government BY FORCE is the only way we are going to solve the current level of corruption and disregard for human life. The US is turning into Nazi Germany, and lots of people don't even seem to care.

I care. Others should too, because they or the ones they love could be the victims of the next 9/11.
So, are we to worry about a revolution being organized by people who can't even organize their sock drawer?

Count me among the underwhelmed.

"The twoofers are revolting!"

"You can say that again!"

[~enigma~]

So, are we to worry about a revolution being organized by people who can't even organize their sock drawer?

Count me among the underwhelmed.

"The twoofers are revolting!"

"You can say that again!"I guess that LCF isn't aware that the myspace woowoo group had a thread deleted by myspace that was discussing an armed revolution. The woowoos have put crosshairs on themselves and talk of arms will serve no purpose except to hasten their demise. but then again, do you really think the government is going to worry about a bunch of jerks that live in their mother's basement?

ETA - for those of you who think myspace isn't monitored, just ask 14 year old Julia Wilson for clarification.

[Calcas]

Somebody should tell those lossers that as soon as they even hint at organizing an armed revolution and the government thinks there is any possibility of it being true, they are signing their own death warrents.

Oh, they're coming SOOO close. I hope they take it up a notch.

There was an article in our paper today about a local man who wrote a letter to the editior and said that when Sadaam was hung, "they killed the wrong guy."

The next day he was paid a visit by the Secret Service.

[aggle-rithm]

The issues are too important to be buried because painful memories are awakened in the families of survivors.

MM


Are they important enough for you to respond to stateofgrace's request for your version of what happened on 9/11?

Should be pretty simple to do. If the "inside job" theory makes any sense at all, then it shouldn't be an arduous task to simply say, "here's what I think happened:", then fire away.

Personally, I think the reason that no troofer can do this is that they know how silly it would sound if they said it out loud.

Would you like to prove me wrong?

No?

I didn't think so.

[aggle-rithm]

I guess that LCF isn't aware that the myspace woowoo group had a thread deleted by myspace that was discussing an armed revolution. The woowoos have put crosshairs on themselves and talk of arms will serve no purpose except to hasten their demise. but then again, do you really think the government is going to worry about a bunch of jerks that live in their mother's basement?


I'm sure they won't, once they have thoroughly questioned the people involved. Of course, by that time, the poor troofers will be so emotionally scarred that they'll NEVER move out of mom's basement...

[chipmunk stew]

So, are we to worry about a revolution being organized by people who can't even organize their sock drawer?

Count me among the underwhelmed.

"The twoofers are revolting!"

"You can say that again!"
While I'm fairly certain we'll never see Alex Jones leading a charge up the White House steps, I do harbor a worry that someone with just the right blend of sociopathic, paranoid, and violent tendencies may be exposed to this myth and be so infected by it that they take it upon themselves to Do Something About It, resulting in tragedy not unlike the Beltway snipers or the OKC bombing.

edit: I'm mostly worried about people who don't have an online presence to speak of, who just lurk at the CT sites.

[ConspiRaider]

More brilliance coming from the twoofies at LCF:

QUOTE (water_bender @ Jan 22 2007, 01:52 PM)i am of the opinion that violent resistance is the only thing that will enact any real change, and it seems that noone is willing to take it that far.

QUOTE From Ultimist
I am with you, water_bender. These people who think there is a peaceful solution to everything haven't taken the time to look at the real world or at history.

This kind of thing in the past has taken a REVOLUTION in order to fix. I firmly believe that a widescale violent revolt and the ousting of the current government BY FORCE is the only way we are going to solve the current level of corruption and disregard for human life. The US is turning into Nazi Germany, and lots of people don't even seem to care.

I care. Others should too, because they or the ones they love could be the victims of the next 9/11.
Good post. Not all twoofers, but too many of them simply want to get out their rifles and Sig-Sauers and Smittys and Glocks and whatevers and shoot up the joint. Murder other human beings. Because their own lives are so empty and meaningless (in their minds).

For the twoofers in the United States of America having that mindset: They REALLY need to get out a bit and tour some of the other lovely countries on the planet. Only way to be convinced of just how unbelievably good they have it here in the USA. How incredibly lucky they are to be here, or to have been born here.

They've simply GOT to go to Egypt as one of the stops. I was there 28 years ago, and I still vividly recall the tremendous poverty. People gobbling down crusts of bread in the street gutter. Stray children looking for any bit of food or drink to steal. People's faces - fear and desperation etched in permanently.

Comparatively speaking - we here in the USA don't know the meaning of the word poverty.

So go, twoofers! See the world! Then come back, and discuss the "reason" for violence as a "solution".

[The Silver Shadow]

Remember, most of them are still children. They think that they can change the world with their flawed logic. Dylan just harbours that childlike state of mind because he can see himself gaining "respect" from the others who have a childlike state of mind. Mind you, the real kids who happen to be the preteens and early teens, who are dying to be rebellious, they're smart, they just have their brains in the wrong area and eventually, they will see the logic and feel betrayed by Dylan. The movement will collapse in due time, just do what we're currently doing...

[Kaarjuus]

More brilliance coming from the twoofies at LCF:
This kind of thing in the past has taken a REVOLUTION in order to fix. I firmly believe that a widescale violent revolt and the ousting of the current government BY FORCE is the only way we are going to solve the current level of corruption and disregard for human life. The US is turning into Nazi Germany, and lots of people don't even seem to care.


Actually, I find that attitude commendable. This is what I always want to say to such people: if you really believe that your country is lead by totally morally corrupt people who do not hesitate to kill off thousands of innocent citizens, then what the heck are you sitting on your ass surfing the net for, man the barricades!

[Coritani]

Sorry if this has been mentioned before, but Pdoh was banned at the LC forums shotly after his 'conversion'. He became a troofer once more, and was unbanned.

Yet another example of biased moderation.

[Firestone]

Sorry if this has been mentioned before, but Pdoh was banned at the LC forums shotly after his 'conversion'. He became a troofer once more, and was unbanned.

Yet another example of biased moderation.:)
And I was banned there for asking ... whether Pdoh will be unbanned!

[uk_dave]

I banned myself for considering questioning the banning of others and suggesting that those who banned the banned should be banned.

[beachnut]

I am a member of LC because, to date, it's the best forum I've encountered to have a dialogue about the events of 9/11.
MM

I understand and agree; you can say your bomb setting made up tenant stuff at LC and you have people so dumb they agree with and like your ideas. You are a perfect fit at LCF. The LCF and LC film matches your ridiculous stories with the same fervor for fiction and lies as you have. Why would you not be over at a forum that fits your CT ideas?

After seeing your bigoted ideas on 9/11 you will never be banned at the NAZI like censorship for truth that is LCF; and under the careful super censorship of the "leader of the pack of nuts", Dylan, you will are in your element of undereducated non thinking great CTers out to save all from the truth or anything related to truth justice and the good old American way (I suspect Dylan would have been a loyalist in 1776; we would not like Jefferson's NWO). He has everyone saying please do not ban me I just have a simple question; go kowtow to your leader over at LCF.

[uk_dave]

(I suspect Dylan would have been a loyalist in 1776; we would not like Jefferson's NWO).

True, but he would still have been deported to australia sooner or later.

:D

[ConspiRaider]

I banned myself for considering questioning the banning of others and suggesting that those who banned the banned should be banned.
Hmm. Never thought of that.

See I'm trying to secure myself some kind of Banned Badge and your above-mentioned tactic just might be the ticket.

Once I figure it out. There are 5 mentions of "ban" and I am attempting a formula to determine which ones cancel themselves out, which should be cubed and divided by pi, and which should be factored into primes and then cross-multiplied.

[HeyLeroy]

It's been in pre-production since January, 2006? Wow, that's a long time. Good luck with it.
Was banned for this, his first and only post, in LCF>general info>Lounge>Loose Change Final Cut, Will Be In Theaters

[Ripley Twenty-Nine]

Was banned for this, his first and only post, in LCF>general info>Lounge>Loose Change Final Cut, Will Be In Theaters
Are any members of the forum questioning why everyone is being banned, or are they just happy to have all opposing opinions gone as well? I think we can all agree that JREFers would scream bloody murder if Truthers were banned just for differing opinions. That says an awful lot; I just hope that people on the Loose Change forum see that.

[JimBenArm]

Happy Birthday, HeyLeroy! :hbd:

[chippy]

Are any members of the forum questioning why everyone is being banned, or are they just happy to have all opposing opinions gone as well? I think we can all agree that JREFers would scream bloody murder if Truthers were banned just for differing opinions. That says an awful lot; I just hope that people on the Loose Change forum see that.

I think Dylan is running out of patience. I saw a comment he made recently about all the work he's doing with his film and all the pressure he is under right now, and he probably just doesn't want to deal with any crap.

It seems like a more appropriate approach would be to not visit a forum regularly if it pisses you off to do so! You can't just keep banning skeptics from the forum and expect it to keep them away. The opposing viewpoint needs to be expressed, and banning people won't stop that.

Oh yeah, by the way, did anyone notice that one of the LCers thought that since this site was down for a bit, they thought that their IP was banned from this forum? Give me a break.

[HeyLeroy]

Are any members of the forum questioning why everyone is being banned, or are they just happy to have all opposing opinions gone as well? I think we can all agree that JREFers would scream bloody murder if Truthers were banned just for differing opinions. That says an awful lot; I just hope that people on the Loose Change forum see that.

Hey, Rip! Didn't you get banned there, too? See Oliver for your badge.
Happy Birthday, HeyLeroy! :hbd:
Thanks!!

[uk_dave]

I get the feeling that the bannings and thread deletions are less to do with dylans own sensitivities than with an attempt to keep a clean house so that the money men behind LC:FC don't get nervous about the crap posted there, and the newbies which should be (but apparently are not) flocking to that site after the Hustler ...... erm....maybe not.... well, who might be flocking there after the RTE screening of LC:2E don't see the forum in all it's messy glory.

[Ripley Twenty-Nine]

I get the feeling that the bannings and thread deletions are less to do with dylans own sensitivities than with an attempt to keep a clean house so that the money men behind LC:FC don't get nervous about the crap posted there, and the newbies which should be (but apparently are not) flocking to that site after the Hustler ...... erm....maybe not.... well, who might be flocking there after the RTE screening of LC:2E don't see the forum in all it's messy glory.
An excellent thought. You may have hit the nail on the head with that.

[beachnut]

He censors his own posting then he deletes the whole thread.

I would be really upset if he edited out my support of his film in a paper!

Why did he cover up his film backers? Then he had to delete the whole thread!?

Posted by: dylan avery Jan 23 2007, 04:12 PM
JREF. Y'all are a bunch of rule8ing losers. You can quote me on that.
Everyone else, move on to more important things.


Maybe he had to ban himself for saying nice stuff about others.

He is the "truth NAZI"; then Dylan orders everyone else to get back to kowtowing...

[Oliver]

*snip* I haven't made any videos. Until today, that is, and I'll have that up on Google shortly. *snip*


Waddaya mean - on google shortly? :confused:

[uk_dave]

Waddaya mean - on google shortly? :confused:

My understanding is that you have to be over 18 to view it.

And there's Rockettes featured.

And a copy of the NIST report, floating in a bath of baby oil....artistically lit.

Innit? :D

[Oliver]

My understanding is that you have to be over 18 to view it.

And there's Rockettes featured.

And a copy of the NIST report, floating in a bath of baby oil....artistically lit.

Innit? :D

Well, i hoped it would be about the WTC7 papers so i would
get some clues what they´re about. :D

[Orphia Nay]

Of the 24 posts I made before being banned last week, 10 remain.
That's 58% deleted.
Of the 10 that remain, 2 of them were in a thread that was moved to the Ready Room.
So that's 66.6% of posts gone from public view.
Man, they must really love The Truth.

[ConspiRaider]

Of the 24 posts I made before being banned last week, 10 remain.
That's 58% deleted.
Of the 10 that remain, 2 of them were in a thread that was moved to the Ready Room.
So that's 66.6% of posts gone from public view.
Man, they must really love The Truth.
But they told me that Truth was supposed to be 99 and 44/100ths percent PURE!

And now we're down to a third?

We should all pitch in and send LCF a huge drain plug to stop that Truth from escaping! Quick! Before it's all gone!!!

[LashL]

I get the feeling that the bannings and thread deletions are less to do with dylans own sensitivities than with an attempt to keep a clean house so that the money men behind LC:FC don't get nervous about the crap posted there, and the newbies which should be (but apparently are not) flocking to that site after the Hustler ...... erm....maybe not.... well, who might be flocking there after the RTE screening of LC:2E don't see the forum in all it's messy glory.


Well, they (the LooseChangeLooseWithTheTruth boyz and their forumites) are tinhatters, don't forget. The vast majority of them are completely incapable of thinking rationally, critically or analytically.

Much like a hammer sees every problem as a nail, they see every post that might even potentially, theoretically, possibly, maybe kinda sorta, diverge from their cult-speak, or that might potentially, theoretically, possibly, maybe kinda sorta, be viewed as questioning the greatness and omnipotence of their loser "leader of the pack" as a bannable offence.

Do-over is still too stupid and too immature to stop himself from putting his foot in his mouth every time he posts on the Loose Change (LooseWithTheTruth) forum, but then gets all riled up in his typical juvenile fashion when he doesn't receive the 100% devotion and genuflecting reaction that he craves, and just bans anyone who doesn't grovel sufficiently.

Then, when it sinks in to his thick skull how petty and juvenile his posts are, how petty and juvenile his reactions are, and how petty and juvenile his actions will appear to those he is currently trying to impress, he deletes the evidence of his own ineptitude, pettiness, and juvenile tendencies.

EDITED to quote the post I was responding to, as I messed up and didn't hit the "quote" button the first time. Edited again to clarify the "they" I was referring to in the first sentence.

[jhunter1163]

<snip>Much like a hammer sees every problem as a nail..<snip>

That's great. I'm gonna be saying that all week now.

[HyJinX]

Well, they (the LooseChangeLooseWithTheTruth boyz and their forumites) are tinhatters, don't forget. The vast majority of them are completely incapable of thinking rationally, critically or analytically.

Much like a hammer sees every problem as a nail, they see every post that might even potentially, theoretically, possibly, maybe kinda sorta, diverge from their cult-speak, or that might potentially, theoretically, possibly, maybe kinda sorta, be viewed as questioning the greatness and omnipotence of their loser "leader of the pack" as a bannable offence.

Do-over is still too stupid and too immature to stop himself from putting his foot in his mouth every time he posts on the Loose Change (LooseWithTheTruth) forum, but then gets all riled up in his typical juvenile fashion when he doesn't receive the 100% devotion and genuflecting reaction that he craves, and just bans anyone who doesn't grovel sufficiently.

Then, when it sinks in to his thick skull how petty and juvenile his posts are, how petty and juvenile his reactions are, and how petty and juvenile his actions will appear to those he is currently trying to impress, he deletes the evidence of his own ineptitude, pettiness, and juvenile tendencies.

EDITED to quote the post I was responding to, as I messed up and didn't hit the "quote" button the first time. Edited again to clarify the "they" I was referring to in the first sentence.


Nominated. Brilliant post, Brilliant deductions and a Brilliant "calling out" of the twoofer's overall mentality. I only wish that they (twoof revolutionaries) could just soak in one moment of what they are and critic themselves rationally. Unfortunately...that remains my wish. I was once a CT...long before I understood the power of critical thinking and the relevance of actual evidence to support my thoughts. I was utterly changed by this forum. I'm glad I saw the light. Thanks TAM.

[VespaGuy]

Of the 24 posts I made before being banned last week, 10 remain.
That's 58% deleted.
Of the 10 that remain, 2 of them were in a thread that was moved to the Ready Room.
So that's 66.6% of posts gone from public view.
Man, they must really love The Truth.

Before I was banned over there (I was 'A Very Sly Denial'), I noticed a few of my posts dissappear, too.

Dylan had referenced Korey's comment that errors were intentionally left in LC2. I responded by asking if errors were, in fact, left in on purpose. The entire thread disappeared. I then started a thread to ask the question. Once again the thread dissappeared. I finally asked a third time in a thread that Dylan was posting in. Finally Dylan responded by saying that errors were NOT intentionally left in.

So... Either

A ) Dylan is lying and Korey was telling the truth

or

B ) Korey was lying and Dylan is telling the truth.

Any way you slice it, one of the Loose Change crew was/is lying. It's no wonder that my question was continually deleted. I'm not sure why he finally answered it... maybe it was becoming obvious to others that he was running away from questions.

[johnny karate]

This was posted in the Skeptics Area over on the LC forum:

I am often told by skeptics, such as JREFers, that the NIST report must be sound because the structural engineering population of the entire world have not challenged it.

My question is: How can they challenge it when NIST have NOT released their computer simulations?

And then later:

Isnt it quiet in here. It seems the skeptics dont like difficult questions

Someone might want to explain to him that the reason it's so quiet is because almost all of the skeptics have been systematically cleaned out of the LC forum.

And for the record, the question isn't even remotely difficult. It is, however, flawed. It doesn't take into account the following:

1) If NIST's computer simulation models were the sole resource for studying the WTC collapse, then how did all the those structural engineers and other qualified experts manage to research their published papers (you know, the ones that disprove the CT)?

2) Why has there been no outcry in the structural engineer community about lack of access to this information?

3) Why would a structural engineer need to see a computer simulation to determine what every CTer claims is blatantly obvious?

I'd post this response on the LC forum, but of course, I was banned.

[GlennB]

This was posted in the Skeptics Area over on the LC forum:

And then later:

Someone might want to explain to him that the reason it's so quiet is because almost all of the skeptics have been systematically cleaned out of the LC forum.

And for the record, the question isn't even remotely difficult. It is, however, flawed. It doesn't take into account the following:

1) If NIST's computer simulation models were the sole resource for studying the WTC collapse, then how did all the those structural engineers and other qualified experts manage to research their published papers (you know, the ones that disprove the CT)?

2) Why has there been no outcry in the structural engineer community about lack of access to this information?

3) Why would a structural engineer need to see a computer simulation to determine what every CTer claims is blatantly obvious?

I'd post this response on the LC forum, but of course, I was banned.

Gah ! :D
Stop snivelling !
Find yourself a proxy and get at 'em ! (if you can bear it) - or have you already? And this is your cover?.... oooops
:duck:
:catfight:

[The Silver Shadow]

I see that the people at LC don't mind admiring ads, which just HAVE to be put in by the government since they have to distract us from all the crimes that the government committed that day! I made a thread there before my time there was terminated about whether they use Facebook or MySpace, and a couple of members kind of ganged up on me and said that the government created these two as well as the entire media, the notion of school and other things to distract us. Now, they talk about the hot girls you see in the ads on their forum :rolleyes:
http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=2916

[Arus808]

haha:
http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=2736


They want to boycott these companies. Too bad that means they can NEVER EVER fly in an airplane ever again. And most of those companies, do not even deal with the public directly, so how can you boycott a company that you never buy products from?

[pvt1863]

haha:
http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=2736


They want to boycott these companies. Too bad that means they can NEVER EVER fly in an airplane ever again. And most of those companies, do not even deal with the public directly, so how can you boycott a company that you never buy products from?

I'm supposed to boycott Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and Northrop Grumman?!

Where am I going to buy my military hardware from now?

[Guile]

I'm supposed to boycott Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and Northrop Grumman?!

Where am I going to buy my military hardware from now?

Black market. Special prices.

[~enigma~]

I'm supposed to boycott Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and Northrop Grumman?!

Where am I going to buy my military hardware from now?
I buy my toothbrushes from Raytheon :(

[Disinfo Agent]

I don't think this deserves an own Thread, but I have to tell you this. I just debated a Truther in a german Forum for the first time. A textbook example of a Truther. Refering to Nonsense like like the "pull it" quote and blaming the jooooos. You think you made a good point, but he is totally stuck to his believes and comes up with more and more stuff, ignoring the things you just said. It is true, the dumber the CT, the more intelligent he thinks he is. This is so frustrating, I wonder how you guys can do this over and over again :D

[lionking]

Another one new to the forum, so apologies if this has been raised before. The term conspiracy theorists worries me. Relativity and gravity are theories. Even some of the more esoteric social science theories have a degree of schlorship, research and rationality about them. Raising the myriad and often contradictory beliefs of those on the LC forum to "theories" give them status they dont deserve and imply they are really debatable - and I haven't seen a proper debate on that forum.

What we have here are religious-like dogmatists, so CDs????

[Coritani]

Another one new to the forum, so apologies if this has been raised before. The term conspiracy theorists worries me. Relativity and gravity are theories. Even some of the more esoteric social science theories have a degree of schlorship, research and rationality about them. Raising the myriad and often contradictory beliefs of those on the LC forum to "theories" give them status they dont deserve and imply they are really debatable - and I haven't seen a proper debate on that forum.

What we have here are religious-like dogmatists, so CDs????

Hello Lionking, welcome to the forum.

Indeed, some have raised that point as well. To my knowledge, a theory is a tested hypothesis (but I may be wrong about this). Subsequently, some here call them Conspiracy fantasists, or something similar.

[maccy]

He censors his own posting then he deletes the whole thread.

I would be really upset if he edited out my support of his film in a paper!

Why did he cover up his film backers? Then he had to delete the whole thread!?

Maybe he had to ban himself for saying nice stuff about others.

He is the "truth NAZI"; then Dylan orders everyone else to get back to kowtowing...

He's covering up the names of his Executive Producers since they are both Jewish. There was already one poster on that thread worrying about the influence of "international bankers" on Loose Change.

Dylan is treading a difficult line: he doesn't want to take a stand against the truthers who blame the Jooos because he needs the support of the movement to promote Loose Change. He also doesn't want them to know he's working with Jooos. Equally, if his Executive Producers should get wind of just how anti-semitic parts of the "Truth Movement" are they may well withdraw their support (actually I'd expect most producers who became aware of this to pull it - but for a Jewish producer the opinions of some truthers on the "Zionist plot" would be particularly galling).

I think this gives some context to a post from Russell in the "Why won't Dylan/LC ban Nazis?" thread.

The situation has been investigated and resolved.

The explanation given to me for the phrase and the flag background was that nationalism is not bad just because of abuses by certain nations in the past. Many countries are nationalistic and I agree with this. I do not agree with Nazism or any ism that kills people including our own.

Even though the authors quoted have other references to different topics the quotes were not supporting Nazism.

I found no Invision violations. The person responded forthrightly and openly to us.

I was going to let it stand but Dylan became aware of the controversy and decided the thread should be gone.(emphasis mine)

If I was in the business of disrupting Dylan's life, I'd suggest that people keep making posts about Zionism, Israel and Silverstein on the LC board.

[maccy]

Remember, most of them are still children. They think that they can change the world with their flawed logic. Dylan just harbours that childlike state of mind because he can see himself gaining "respect" from the others who have a childlike state of mind. Mind you, the real kids who happen to be the preteens and early teens, who are dying to be rebellious, they're smart, they just have their brains in the wrong area and eventually, they will see the logic and feel betrayed by Dylan. The movement will collapse in due time, just do what we're currently doing...

There's a "How old are you?" thread here:

http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=1853

[HeyLeroy]

Another one new to the forum, so apologies if this has been raised before. The term conspiracy theorists worries me. Relativity and gravity are theories. Even some of the more esoteric social science theories have a degree of schlorship, research and rationality about them. Raising the myriad and often contradictory beliefs of those on the LC forum to "theories" give them status they dont deserve and imply they are really debatable - and I haven't seen a proper debate on that forum.

What we have here are religious-like dogmatists, so CDs????

Yep, you've gotten it pretty much correct.

Theory

Most people use the word theory to mean uncertainty, guesswork, or a rough idea, but in science it has a different meaning. A scientific theory explains facts or phenomena that have been shown to be true by repeated independent tests and experiments. An educated guess in science is called a hypothesis.

Scientific theories are not laws, which describe phenomena thought to be invariable. Theories are generally used to describe why certain laws work. For example, the law of gravity is known to be true for falling bodies, but how and why it works is explained by Albert Einstein's general theory of relativity. Einstein's theory was accepted as true only after repeated experimentation and observation. Yet not even laws are absolute. They are rarely overturned, but they may be amended should new data warrant it.

--Maia Weinstock

I call 'em Conspiracy Fantasists.

[Pardalis]

I prefer to call them d*ckheads but that's just me. :D

[chipmunk stew]

I prefer to call them d*ckheads but that's just me. :D
Why "duckheads"??? Because they're quacks, or something? :con2:

[uk_dave]

Why "duckheads"??? Because they're quacks, or something? :con2:

I thought it was 'dockheads' coz they all hang around the docks......erm.... 'nuff said. ;)

[Orphia Nay]

Vespa Guy, you (A Very Sly Denial) were banned for pointing out that Dylan Avery lies (or Rowe)?

:newlol :newlol :newlol

I was trying to work out which one of us was AVSD. I had my suspicions, but they were wrong. Good stuff over there, VG. :D


I don't think this deserves an own Thread, but I have to tell you this. I just debated a Truther in a german Forum for the first time. A textbook example of a Truther. Refering to Nonsense like like the "pull it" quote and blaming the jooooos. You think you made a good point, but he is totally stuck to his believes and comes up with more and more stuff, ignoring the things you just said. It is true, the dumber the CT, the more intelligent he thinks he is. This is so frustrating, I wonder how you guys can do this over and over again :D

We just do it to collect NWO bonuses for being called "shills". ;) :rolleyes: Welcome to the forum, Disinfo Agent. :)

[LashL]

I don't think this deserves an own Thread, but I have to tell you this. I just debated a Truther in a german Forum for the first time. A textbook example of a Truther. Refering to Nonsense like like the "pull it" quote and blaming the jooooos. You think you made a good point, but he is totally stuck to his believes and comes up with more and more stuff, ignoring the things you just said. It is true, the dumber the CT, the more intelligent he thinks he is. This is so frustrating, I wonder how you guys can do this over and over again :D

Welcome to the forum, Disinfo Agent. :welcome4

It is, indeed, difficult to attempt a legitimate debate with twoofers as they tend to flit from one tinhat talking point to another without ever positing any actual evidence or any actual facts. They simply regurgitate what they've read on tinhat websites, avoid answering legitimate questions, avoid acknowledging actual facts and evidence, and avoid putting forward anything of substance to support their alleged beliefs.

But we do it for the benefit of others who read the forum, those others who may have seen some of the tinhat sites and may have been tempted to buy into the woo but who are smart enough to look for facts and evidence rather than blindly buy into the woo.

Even though it can seem a waste of time trying to explain things calmly and rationally for the hundredth or thousandth time to a dyed-in-the-woo conspiracy fantasist who pays no attention to your rational posts, it is of enormous benefit to others reading because they can see first hand that the conspiracy fantasist is not engaging in debate at all, but merely regurgitating crap from tinhat sites and running away from legitimate discussion or debate.

Another one new to the forum, so apologies if this has been raised before. The term conspiracy theorists worries me. Relativity and gravity are theories. Even some of the more esoteric social science theories have a degree of schlorship, research and rationality about them. Raising the myriad and often contradictory beliefs of those on the LC forum to "theories" give them status they dont deserve and imply they are really debatable - and I haven't seen a proper debate on that forum.

What we have here are religious-like dogmatists, so CDs????

Welcome, lionking. :welcome4
I agree with you on the terminology. I've always disliked the term "conspiracy theorists" because it seemed to convey a sense of legitimacy upon tinhatters that they do not deserve, and I used to call them CTers even though it was not grammatically correct. But from now on, it's "conspiracy fantasists" for me.

[VespaGuy]

Vespa Guy, you (A Very Sly Denial) were banned for pointing out that Dylan Avery lies (or Rowe)?

:newlol :newlol :newlol

I was trying to work out which one of us was AVSD. I had my suspicions, but they were wrong. Good stuff over there, VG. :D


Thank you.

I actually lasted a few months over there. I was always on my best behaviour and withstood plenty of name-calling from the resident lowlifes (Pdoh, KT, etc). Although I engaged in some back & forth with posters there, there was never anything that resembled debate.

And although I never deserved it, I'm quite happy I was banned. I wasted so much time at LC banging my head against the wall, using logic and reason - many times discovering that my internet 'opponent' was merely a child who simply parrots the claims made by the older boys in the schoolyard.

[Ripley Twenty-Nine]

Thank you.

I actually lasted a few months over there. I was always on my best behaviour and withstood plenty of name-calling from the resident lowlifes (Pdoh, KT, etc). Although I engaged in some back & forth with posters there, there was never anything that resembled debate.

And although I never deserved it, I'm quite happy I was banned. I wasted so much time at LC banging my head against the wall, using logic and reason - many times discovering that my internet 'opponent' was merely a child who simply parrots the claims made by the older boys in the schoolyard.
I found that 'How Old Are You' thread on the forum to be enlightening.. It made an awful lot more sense when you saw how old a lot of the forumites are. 'highwaymanq' is a regular poster there, and has some pretty wild ideas... He's 13! I believed some absolutely crazy things when I was 13 too, then I hit puberty and started actually thinking. :)

[VespaGuy]

I found that 'How Old Are You' thread on the forum to be enlightening.. It made an awful lot more sense when you saw how old a lot of the forumites are. 'highwaymanq' is a regular poster there, and has some pretty wild ideas... He's 13! I believed some absolutely crazy things when I was 13 too, then I hit puberty and started actually thinking. :)

Exactly. I forgot the name of one of the posters I was debating (he was hung up on the 'ISI connection', and resorted to horrible hyperbole (i.e. 'the Pentagon is the most secure building in the world') whenever he attempted to make a point.). When he began bitching about the facist government and losing his freedoms, I asked how old he was. He never answered. And here is why:

Most of the posters over there are children. They bitch about losing their freedom while freely expressing their personal opinion over the internet. They bitch about how the government controls everything, yet they post on a site that was started by 3 kids with no education who have started their own business - a business which directly and deliberately accuses the government of murder. They bitch about taxes while the only money they make is from mowing their neighbors lawn. They bitch about DUI roadblocks, while they pedal their Schwinns to school. They bitch about how horrible things are nowadays with absolutely no real world experience to make any comparisons to.

The LC forum is crawling with children. I'm still looking forward to the LC version of the JREF "expertise" thread (The thread where JREFers posted their education and areas of knowledge). I'd love to see a thread like that at the LC forums, but I won't hold my breath.

[Calcas]

I'm still looking forward to the LC version of the JREF "expertise" thread (The thread where JREFers posted their education and areas of knowledge). I'd love to see a thread like that at the LC forums, but I won't hold my breath.

That's a great idea. It sounds like a job for...

Oliver!

[uk_dave]

I believed some absolutely crazy things when I was 13 too, then I hit puberty and started actually thinking. :)

About girls? :D

[Disinfo Agent]

Welcome to the forum, Disinfo Agent. :welcome4

It is, indeed, difficult to attempt a legitimate debate with twoofers as they tend to flit from one tinhat talking point to another without ever positing any actual evidence or any actual facts. They simply regurgitate what they've read on tinhat websites, avoid answering legitimate questions, avoid acknowledging actual facts and evidence, and avoid putting forward anything of substance to support their alleged beliefs.

But we do it for the benefit of others who read the forum, those others who may have seen some of the tinhat sites and may have been tempted to buy into the woo but who are smart enough to look for facts and evidence rather than blindly buy into the woo.

Even though it can seem a waste of time trying to explain things calmly and rationally for the hundredth or thousandth time to a dyed-in-the-woo conspiracy fantasist who pays no attention to your rational posts, it is of enormous benefit to others reading because they can see first hand that the conspiracy fantasist is not engaging in debate at all, but merely regurgitating crap from tinhat sites and running away from legitimate discussion or debate.


Thanks for the welcome. Apparently the "Truther" I debated, was a Troll, just seeking for attention. He was pretty hardcore and moronic, but I thought that was normal, considering the Trutherdebates I have seen before here. But I often thought "That guy can not be serious". He posted his stuff for two weeks (I debated him for one evening), after admitting that he now "had enough food" (well, now he claims that he just wanted to fool me, but I may be stupid, but not THAT stupid). That makes me wonder, how many Truther on this Forum are Trolls who are not serious and just enjoy the attention you pay to them...

[A W Smith]

The LC forum is crawling with children. I'm still looking forward to the LC version of the JREF "expertise" thread (The thread where JREFers posted their education and areas of knowledge). I'd love to see a thread like that at the LC forums, but I won't hold my breath.


I would be looking forward to an Expertise thread over at pilots for truth. :D

[Ripley Twenty-Nine]

That makes me wonder, how many Truther on this Forum are Trolls who are not serious and just enjoy the attention you pay to them...
It's a good question. Unfortunately from reading the Loose Change boards, it appears that the line between satire and 'Trooth' is paper thin. With the things they are proposing, how could you possibly differentiate between them??

[Oliver]

That's a great idea. It sounds like a job for...

Oliver!


Huh? There was a thread about what they are doing
for their living. I guess i read it yesterday - so it may
be still there.

[Calcas]

Huh? There was a thread about what they are doing
for their living. I guess i read it yesterday - so it may
be still there.
No silly. They had a thread about their age.

Vespaguy said, "I'm still looking forward to the LC version of the JREF "expertise" thread (The thread where JREFers posted their education and areas of knowledge). I'd love to see a thread like that at the LC forums, but I won't hold my breath."

Your mission, Ollie, if you choose to accept it, is to start one overe there so they can all chime in with their respective areas of expertise.:D

[uk_dave]

Our old mate 28th Kingdom (you remember, the lying liar who always tells lies) has found a home at LCF and 'look-up' has gotten all excited.....

http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=3037&st=0#entry11534178

lol

[Oliver]

No silly. They had a thread about their age.

Vespaguy said, "I'm still looking forward to the LC version of the JREF "expertise" thread (The thread where JREFers posted their education and areas of knowledge). I'd love to see a thread like that at the LC forums, but I won't hold my breath."

Your mission, Ollie, if you choose to accept it, is to start one overe there so they can all chime in with their respective areas of expertise.:D

No no, there was such a thread. I remember it because Killtown
told me he´s a Shepherd - and he repeated it in this thread. But
maybe it was moved or deleted because i can´t find it...

Anyway - I don´t want to Troll over there after being invited
as a respected member.

[Ripley Twenty-Nine]

Our old mate 28th Kingdom (you remember, the lying liar who always tells lies) has found a home at LCF and 'look-up' has gotten all excited.....

lol
I love it how they throw out a piece of absolutely ridiculous 'evidence' like this, and sit back saying 'Ha! Come on skeptics, let's see you debunk THIS!'.

Surely they know that all of the skeptics besides a few have been banned from the forum?

[Comsat Angel]

Our old mate 28th Kingdom (you remember, the lying liar who always tells lies) has found a home at LCF and 'look-up' has gotten all excited.....
lol

I read about 3 posts and realised they were discussing how the aircraft impact had affected the "CD" in that part of the building.

Hello? if an aircraft hits your building you don't - really - you don't need any form of CD. Aircraft + high speed + building = collapse.

Some artefacts on a video and they think the NWO is going to fall.

I hope they carry on big time - they're enormously entertaining, if you divorce them from the reality of what happened.

[Calcas]

Somebody should save the whole "Val Mcclatchy phone call" thread over there before it gets deleted.

Val has an easy lawsuit against the guy who illegally taped the call without her consent since PA requires consent of both parties.

And, Dylan has even acknowledged the law but hasn't yanked the thread (yet) which could spell bad news for him too.

[Arus808]

Somebody should save the whole "Val Mcclatchy phone call" thread over there before it gets deleted.

Val has an easy lawsuit against the guy who illegally taped the call without her consent since PA requires consent of both parties.

And, Dylan has even acknowledged the law but hasn't yanked the thread (yet) which could spell bad news for him too.

keeping tabs and screenshots as it grows. ^_^
wav file saved.

Love pdoh's reply...typical clueless responses ('listen to the way she hesitates..proves she's a liar').. well if someone is harassing me over a photo and about what i saw 5 years ago, I'd be annoyed and would hesitate answering any questions by morons.

[Calcas]

keeping tabs and screenshots as it grows. ^_^
wav file saved.

Love pdoh's reply...typical clueless responses ('listen to the way she hesitates..proves she's a liar').. well if someone is harassing me over a photo and about what i saw 5 years ago, I'd be annoyed and would hesitate answering any questions by morons.

Perfect.

Who wants to email the whole thing to Val and her lawyer?

[Arus808]

well, the thread is still going, so Im going to keep tabs until it disappears. Everything that is said in that thread, is also fodder, because they are outright libeling her as well.

I'll give anyone who is interested the files...^_^

[Calcas]

well, the thread is still going, so Im going to keep tabs until it disappears. Everything that is said in that thread, is also fodder, because they are outright libeling her as well.

I'll give anyone who is interested the files...^_^

Keep it going.

I can't believe Dylan has allowed it to continue after he ACKNOWLEDGED in the thread that the phone call was illegal. Did he take an extra stupid pill today?

[beachnut]

skunkrider is just like 28th and terrorcell and killtown. They should start a new web site; dolts for 9/11 lies; we make them up we believe them. http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=3037&st=0#entry11534178

Where do idiots like this find the money to buy a computer let alone a keyboard? How can they type? No one this dumb can type can they? Is there mother typing this for them.

I have to say I am not attacking these guys, just their ideas and lack of evidence; which makes them very stupid to say the things they do.

[~enigma~]

And, Dylan has even acknowledged the law but hasn't yanked the thread (yet) which could spell bad news for him too.Thanks to that NWO liaison Enigma :)

[Calcas]

Thanks to that NWO liaison Enigma :)

Props to you my friend...:D

[HyJinX]

I just listened to the phone call and I gotta tell ya...I'm seriously sick to my stomach listening to this jackass bullcrap his way through this conversation. This lady seems genuinely sincere...she donates all the proceeds to the victim's funds and yet they're on LC Forum calling her a liar and a fraud. I am, by no stretch of the imagination, a violent person. But I wouldn't mind 5 minutes with this Jeff character and some brass knuckles. I do, however, love the fact that she called KlownTown a coward...not that we didn't already know this.

Seriously...they're sad, despicable, crazy and they need to be taught a lesson in maturity and tact. I hope they get sued royally.

This is WWAAAYYYY over the line as far as I'm concerned.

Ok...sorry for the emotional rant. Back to your regularly scheduled program.

[~enigma~]

I am partial to the email idea. Actually someone should burn the screenshot of the thread to a CD along with the wav of the phone call then send that to Val and her lawyer.

[Arus808]

Yes Killclown and Alexvegas, i know you're both trolling here as well. And no Im not a dumbass. There is nothing in her conversation that tells of how long after the plume of smoke where she assumes the video footage was taken. Nor did she even give you the name of the person who took that video.

She's probably assuming, like anyone that someone took video; or heard that someone took video. however, she can't confirm or deny it.

If you bothered to stop harassing her and calling her a liar everytime she says something, maybe you can get a straight answer from her.

As it is, she's already been harassed and libeled by you and your fantasy claims about her. so, its safe to assume that she is tired of answering questions and just gives whatever answers she wants to get you guys off the phone so she can go on with her own life.

Stop harassing her. Tell your ilk to stop bothering her.
The more you continue the harass her, the more likely she will press charges, and will take you (dont think you are anonymous, people already have tracked down who you really are), Dylan and his forum/site, and every site that has your posted libel.


And yes keep on posting in that thread. Its only serving as evidence to your guys antics and libelous claims. Maybe this will convince her to finally seek legal remedies against your harassment of her.

[T.A.M.]

I feel similar to LashL, and have stated so here on many occasions. It is always better to engage these people in rational, civil debate, as the fence sitters and lurkers will usually see through the truther BS when presented in such a way.

I will admit, that I am going through another phase of "intolerance" for them as of late, as one can see if you read my posts over the last day or two. This is normal, and I call it a symptom of DTFS (Debating with Truthers Fatigue Syndrome). Others here believe it to simply be the result of a mysterious infection that passes into the body from the large wound made on ones forehead from beating it against the truther wall repeatedly.

My intolerance, in a few days will pass, and my posts will resume their usual civil tone. Until then, I am venting...and I am ok with it.

TAM;)

[beachnut]

http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=3037&st=0#entry11534178

Someone has doctored a video! All the idiots are peeing on themselves! Wow; Who did this and tricked them?

Pdoh; did you do this?

Is 28th really a smart kid just playing both sides? Okay who has the name
9.11 Truth ?

Who is tricking them now?