Nick Levis: Roberts is "The biggest and most clueless idiots." re:Fetzer/Hardfire

[greyleonard]

Nick Levis aka Jack Riddler: When I met Roberts on the street last S11, I took his number and seriously considered challenging him to a debate - for about 5 minutes. Just too much of a lightweight, and me too much of an intellectual snob. Why should I beat on him, and what would I prove once I did?

It's no wonder he ends up stacked up against an unstable, johnny-come-lately, two-bit attention whore who usurps "9/11 Truth" and peddles the weakest or most ridiculous ideas -- most likely with full intent to **** up the whole scene. Fetzer redefines the anti-Hippocratic oath: First, do lots of harm.

Wake me up when Nafeez Ahmed is taking on, oh, at least Bill Weinberg, if not Alexander Cockburn.

DU 9/11 Forum thread- The Roberts-Fetzer Debates (http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=155383&mesg_id=155412)

[T.A.M.]

He isnt subtle about his cowardice...

"I'm too good and Gravy too weak to debate." there is a blow off out of fear if I have ever heard one.

WUSS

TAM;)

[Regnad Kcin]

What is it with truthers and debates? Either you have the goods or you don't.

[Disbelief]

I love the "I would crush you, but I won't" idea. You would think that someone in the truth movement would be more than happy to show up a famous (or is it infamous) debunker. That would do more for their "cause" than LCFC.

[Gravy]

I hope ryanitis gallina isn't going around. I haven't had my shots.

[T.A.M.]

I love the "I would crush you, but I won't" idea. You would think that someone in the truth movement would be more than happy to show up a famous (or is it infamous) debunker. That would do more for their "cause" than LCFC.

exactly...it is a common blow off technique used by people to avoid a particular situation or argument.

How easy would it be for Hillary Clinton to say...

"Barack Obama? He is aweful. Why should I debate him? I am way better than he is, and there others much better that I can focus my energy on."

But she won't say such, because (a) it isnt true, but more importantly, because (b) people will see it as a blow off, and then she will be seen as fearful...a coward.

TAM:)

[T.A.M.]

I find it funny how this guy, Nick Levi, who I have never heard of, and I am sure most of the truthers havent, calls Fetzer a has been, a johnny come lately, when Fetzer is one of the most famous truthers on the planet, a founder in many ways, of the movement as it is today.

I agree, Fetzer, in many ways is weak on any given topic, but who the **** is Nick Levi?

TAM:)

[MikeW]

There's a six minute film at http://911blogger.com/node/3269 for anyone who wants an idea of what Levis thinks are some of the main talking points of 9/11

[Brainster]

I'd always wondered who Jack Riddler was; he's certainly full of himself. And full of something else as well, as we can see in this video of him from Korea:

X2S66vzJFVk

Same old, same old--make ridiculous claims like that drills were going on for precisely the same attacks that we suffered, that maybe the hijackers are alive, that if standard procedures had been followed, blahblahblah.

[T.A.M.]

Looks to me like an attention *****, but I could be wrong.

TAM:)

All he has do is ask nicely and I am sure someone else will put him on TV...lol

[greyleonard]

Looks to me like an attention *****, but I could be wrong.

I think that's close.
He's quick to publicly ridicule rational debunking of ridiculous 9/11 Truth claims (Loose Change, for example) relying on the argument that the debunked claims are so ridiculous that they needn't be debunked in the first place, therefore the debunking is valueless, but I think he's just trying to carve out a pseudo-intellectual niche in the 9/11 Truth Industry market.

[beachnut]

There's a six minute film at http://911blogger.com/node/3269 for anyone who wants an idea of what Levis thinks are some of the main talking points of 9/11
Standard truther junk. He looks and acts like a clueless person talking BS with no facts. What would he debate, he has no evidence. It would be a short debate; oops he will not debate, he could not line up his facts yet.

I can see his next press release, "Nicholas Levis has decided to debate as soon as he organizes his evidence." Next update 9/11/Never. (date changed for cause)

[~enigma~]

2112This is the title of one of the best albums from one of Canada's best progressive bands RUSH...no more mentioning anything of theirs in the same sentence or even paragraph as a woo. Do not besmirch their name like that :)

[Phil]

This is the title of one of the best albums from one of Canada's best progressive bands RUSH...no more mentioning anything of theirs in the same sentence or even paragraph as a woo. Do not besmirch their name like that :)

I was going to say the same thing, but I'm too much of an intellectual snob.

[~enigma~]

I was going to say the same thing, but I'm too much of an intellectual snob.
Well I am glad to speak for you this time :)

[Gravy]

Wake me up when Nafeez Ahmed is taking on, oh, at least Bill Weinberg, if not Alexander Cockburn.Since none of these people are MIHOP or LIHOP, Mr. Levis will have a long snooze.

[T.A.M.]

I think that's close.
He's quick to publicly ridicule rational debunking of ridiculous 9/11 Truth claims (Loose Change, for example) relying on the argument that the debunked claims are so ridiculous that they needn't be debunked in the first place, therefore the debunking is valueless, but I think he's just trying to carve out a pseudo-intellectual niche in the 9/11 Truth Industry market.

Well if that is true, we should just round up all said arguments, put out a video, and then he will say the entire 9/11 truth movement is "so silly, that it needn't be debunked", then we can all go home.

He is like the rest of them, started out with questions, found a group, a world within itself where he feels he "is somebody", then saw the potential to become a big fish in a small pond, and is now trying to make it so.

TAM:)

[David Wong]

I'm still waiting for that list of which Truthers are the "real" or "legitimate" ones, worthy of debate, and which ones are merely crazy or disinfo agents.

It seems like they all wind up in that second category just moments after getting debunked. So which ones are left now? Those names that guy mentioned, somehow I've managed to completely miss them in everything I've read about the Truth movement.

[defaultdotxbe]

i find this futurama quote appropriate:

FNOG - No girl has the will of a warrior. You have the will of a housewife or, at best, the schoolmarm.

LEELA - That's it. I'll take you on right now.

FNOG - Very well. But, you see, I have the will of the warrior. Therefore, the battle is already over. The winner? Me! Rematch? You lose again! Had enough? I thought so!

[T.A.M.]

This is just a guess, based on the way the majority of the truthers relate to them in convo...

Crazy
------
Fetzer, Wood, Reynolds, Rajter, Bowman, Craig Ranke, Aldo, Balsamo (JDX), Alex Jones, John Conner (M. Dice)

Legit
-----
Hoffman, Thompson, Avery/Bermas/Rowe (researchers??), Pickering, Dewdey, Griffin, S. Jones, Tarpley


Anyone wanna add to the list.

TAM:)

[greyleonard]

I'm still waiting for that list of which Truthers are the "real" or "legitimate" ones, worthy of debate, and which ones are merely crazy...

A comparison with "authentic" Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, Christians, Muslims, and Scotsman, isn't too tangential, is it?

[greyleonard]

I hope ryanitis gallina isn't going around

? .

[Checkmite]

This is just a guess, based on the way the majority of the truthers relate to them in convo...

Crazy
------
Fetzer, Wood, Reynolds, Rajter, Bowman, Craig Ranke, Aldo, Balsamo (JDX), Alex Jones, John Conner (M. Dice)

Legit
-----
Hoffman, Thompson, Avery/Bermas/Rowe (researchers??), Pickering, Dewdey, Griffin, S. Jones, Tarpley


Anyone wanna add to the list.

TAM:)

The funny thing is, when one of the "crazy" ones shows up at Ground Zero, all the Truthers still swarm around them.

[Brainster]

This is just a guess, based on the way the majority of the truthers relate to them in convo...

Crazy
------
Fetzer, Wood, Reynolds, Rajter, Bowman, Craig Ranke, Aldo, Balsamo (JDX), Alex Jones, John Conner (M. Dice)

Legit
-----
Hoffman, Thompson, Avery/Bermas/Rowe (researchers??), Pickering, Dewdey, Griffin, S. Jones, Tarpley


Anyone wanna add to the list.

TAM:)

Bowman's generally considered in the "legit" category, although of course he professes to be agnostic about the inside job stuff. And you can't have a crazy list without Nico Haupt; even the folks who support him think he's a madman.

Tarpley and Hoffman somehow get passes (http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2007/04/fetzer-gets-in-some-decent-points.html) for their "directed energy weapon" speculation.

[T.A.M.]

damn:

I meant to put Bowman in the Legit list. I mixed him up with Jimmy Walters, who definitely goes in the crazy list.

TAM:)

[~enigma~]

damn:

I meant to put Bowman in the Legit list. I mixed him up with Jimmy Walters, who definitely goes in the crazy list.

TAM:)
You left Hufschmid out of the crazies...your not turning woo are you? I can start a brand new CT about your mistakecoverup :)

[Gravy]

? .ryanitis = Inflammation of the Ryan, also known as Scholara. gallina = chicken.

ETA: oh, this also works for Ryan Dawson (http://www.rys2sense.com/anti-neocons/viewtopic.php?t=6430), the semiliterate anti-Semite who said about me: "I would own this guy no problem."

[T.A.M.]

You left Hufschmid out of the crazies...your not turning woo are you? I can start a brand new CT about your mistakecoverup :)

Wooooouldnt you like to know.

The only thing Woo about me, is the "Woo Hoo!!" that comes out of my mouth every time the Ottawa Senators score a goal.

TAM:)

[sivazh]

Yeah, right, and I COULD go into a UFC fight with Chuck Lidell and throw him around the ring, break his legs, crush his face in and basically murdalize him, but, I won't.

I love that argument.

[T.A.M.]

Yeah, right, and I COULD go into a UFC fight with Chuck Lidell and throw him around the ring, break his legs, crush his face in and basically murdalize him, but, I won't.

I love that argument.

lol...nice one.

Like I could totally kick Stephen Hawkings ass in a debate on string theory...but I won't.

TAM;)

[pomeroo]

Nick Levis? A cowardly conspiracy liar. I recall dialogue from the original King Kong:

Woman: "Say, what are we going to see anyhow?"

Man: "I think it's some kind of gorilla."

Woman: "Ain't we got enough of those in New York?"

[hubbub2]

As I've said before...In a debate with ANY twoofer, Gravy would give them the ultimate beatdown and only have to use three brain cells...two to debate and one to reload!

And if any one wants to use that statement as a signature, just make sure I get the credit for it. Thank you...and now for a medley of showtunes...

[GwionX]

lol...nice one.

Like I could totally kick Stephen Hawkings ass in a debate on string theory...but I won't.

TAM;)

I read that Stephen Hawking went zero gravity today. Looked like he had a good time.

[Vincent Vega]

I'd always wondered who Jack Riddler was; he's certainly full of himself. And full of something else as well, as we can see in this video of him from Korea:

X2S66vzJFVk

Same old, same old--make ridiculous claims like that drills were going on for precisely the same attacks that we suffered, that maybe the hijackers are alive, that if standard procedures had been followed, blahblahblah.

Why do truthers all think they are experts on airspace defense?

[Slayhamlet]

This is the title of one of the best albums from one of Canada's best progressive bands RUSH...no more mentioning anything of theirs in the same sentence or even paragraph as a woo. Do not besmirch their name like that :)

I agree, great band! :D

[Slayhamlet]

Nick Levis- I like this guy, very eloquent indeed.

A debate with Gravy? No, that wouldn't be a very good idea. He would probably bury Gravy in his own ****.

It certainly would be different from debating a kooky spacebeamer. Who has been "excommunicated" by the movement.


Strange behavior for a man who you say would "probably bury Gravy in his own ****." What do you think accounts for it?

[Foolmewunz]

Levis is MIHOP Lite.
Most of what he's on is that Anti-Bush drug. In a list of his forty points, he only links to one alternate site, and that's under controlled demolition ideas, so that's likely his one key theory. Almost everything else can be traced to liberal/left Anti-Bush/Anti-NeoCon philosophy.

http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20041221155307646

Basically, he might be able to be convinced on the CD, but highly unlikely he's going to reverse his political bias and paranoia that the NeoCons are out to get us and would do anything.

Check out the 40 points. He's still pointing to the 2004 Zogby poll, stock puts, the 2.3 trillion missing at the Pentagon, Griffin's "new Pearl Harbor" song, and several other old-hat arguments.

He's like Rosie in drag. Hates the government and NWO and thus the current administration, and is willing to believe anything about them. He's still spouting the crap about how the current administration benefited from the attacks on 9/11. (Well, he may not still be spouting it but he hasn't cleaned up his website of old material if he has any new rants).

I did find something more interesting on his site. Will post separately, though, as unlike this thread it isn't solely whiney ranting stuff, but something possibly interesting to look into.

[The Doc]

Back to the topic at hand,

It is so childish to see supposed "scholars" and "experts" acting like children when challenged to a debate. "OMFG I'd pwn choo... but I am teh leet, so stfu and gtfo".

Put up or shut up, is what I say. If they really think they could beat Mark in a debate... prove it.

[T.A.M.]

NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Enigma was calling you a cuss word without actually using a cuss word by saying you are a rule#8 (you are an a**hole for instance).

Got it?

TAM:)

[~enigma~]

You are singling him out, which is taking a political stance, given that the DEMs were in power for all of 9 months prior to 9/11. You are not bringing him up in terms of a CT, but rather just to bash him.

It is like if I bashed upon the President of Iran in here, but made no reference in his role in a CT...it would be in the wrong subforum.

TAM:)
TAM...take my word on this. It is easier to put the little idiot on ignore. The way he's going he will get himself banned as a sock of our most prolific sock soon.

[pagan]

No.

We were calling for moderation because you were posting in the wrong forum, given the topic/tone/details of your postings...it belongs in the politics forum.

He then got frustrated with you, and basically called you a cuss word in a way that allows him to do so without actually cussing.

TAM:)

In other words, dirty tactics?

I am a bit puzzled? I got these multiple automatic mails. Someone must have taken a decision?

[beachnut]

Like Nick most truthers avoid facts to support their ideas and just talk the standard lies about 9/11. Simple research can quickly find facts to see right through truthmovement lies. Knowledge and judgement are the enemies of the "truth" movement. Have yet to find one truther able to use these tools.

[beachnut]

Why is the truth movement full of people who lack knowledge and judgement? Nick is a good example. Why?

[~enigma~]

Like Nick most truthers avoid facts to support their ideas and just talk the standard lies about 9/11. Simple research can quickly find facts to see right through truthmovement lies. Knowledge and judgement are the enemies of the truth movement. Have yet to find one truther able to use these tools.
For a moment, i thought you were going to start singing about the old soap "Days Of Our Lives" but your lyrics were Nick's Lies :)

[beachnut]

For a moment, i thought you were going to start singing about the old soap "Days Of Our Lives" but your lyrics were Nick's Lies :)Laura would not let the real Nick tell lies of 9/11, would she? Pagan could use some knowledge, and too bad he will never find a fact to support 9/11 movement of lies.

[Quad4_72]

Like Nick most truthers avoid facts to support their ideas and just talk the standard lies about 9/11. Simple research can quickly find facts to see right through truthmovement lies. Knowledge and judgement are the enemies of the "truth" movement. Have yet to find one truther able to use these tools.

Fixed. That was a critical error.

[beachnut]

Yes, I get it.

But, remember one of my opponents threatend me with mod action "if I pushed". He seems to have got what he wanted...:DWhy are you unable to bring up one fact about 9/11? Why do you think Nick Levis video interview was fact less?

[beachnut]

Nope, Dubya bashing is a very essential part of 911 truth or as you would have it 911 conspiracy.
No facts just talk. About par for a truther, no facts, just talk. I agree. Have yet to see a truther with facts. Why is that? This Nick guy has no facts, why are truthers lacking facts?

[beachnut]

no facts yet just more talk, must be a requirement of truther to be without facts, no ability to research, no knowledge on 9/11, no judgement, no facts, no truth for 9/11 liars. No knowledge on 9/11? Just talk. Nick had no facts just talk, and doubt he can debate anything without facts.

[procrastinate maybe]

This thread is worthy of a kick, since Mark Roberts has posted in defence of himself in the DU thread. I should point out that I do have particular interest here since I have posted in the DU 'dungeon' on and off for about two years under the name 'Anarcho-Socialist'.

Also JackRiddler/Nick Levis still hasn't shown himself, but then that's not particularly surprising. He tried to character assassinate in the name of 'TRUTH!111' and got himself caught out.