OK, who dares debate Charlie Sheen? - Page 4

bill smith · 15th September 2009, 02:42 PM

Video with Charlie Sheen who makes a video address to the President about 2/3 of the way through.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyKR2...e=channel_page

Congruentruth · 15th September 2009, 02:49 PM

Originally Posted by WildCat

What's stopping him from signing up here?

Well, That's obvious. He wants to have a real debate.

bill smith · 15th September 2009, 02:52 PM

Originally Posted by Congruentruth

Well, That's obvious. He wants to have a real debate.

lol

bill smith · 15th September 2009, 02:57 PM

Is that you Charlie ?

beachnut · 15th September 2009, 04:52 PM

Originally Posted by 911kongen

... I think it is important to answer to persons getting on like Fox News and CNN. Ignoring them is a mistake... But MacKey, I respect that you dont agree! I just whanted to know why..

There is no debate, Sheen has moronic ideas on 911. He has no evidence and not a single person can help support his failed ideas on 911. Sheen has these ideas due to his complete ignorance on the subject. People having problems seeing Sheen is full of lies on 911 have serious problems thinking for themselves.

Charlie is self-debunking since his 911 views are based on ignorance, hearsay, lies and delusions. No one has evidence to help him.

Quote:

I love Sheen because he's a man unencumbered by self-awareness. Think about it: The world's most famous clueless druggie, gambling-addicted, whore-banger thinks he's uncovered a conspiracy and we should all believe him. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,549904,00.html

... all Sheen lacks is evidence.

WildCat · 15th September 2009, 06:02 PM

Originally Posted by Myriad

I'm sure you could humiliate Charlie Sheen on all the conspiracy talking points, especially the technical ones. I'm also equally sure that he wouldn't care. His goal in any "debate" would be to look and act cooler and more fun to hang out with than you, and being an experienced actor and well-known celebrity he'd probably succeed.

Then, six months later when he tells the gossip interviewer from Parade magazine, "Oh yes, I'm very serious about exposing the 9/11 cover-up. In fact I debated a government engineer on it, and he couldn't refute a single point" -- who's going to set the record straight, and how?

Myriad's Second Law: Before assuming you can win, make sure you know what the game is.

Respectfully,
Myriad

Reminds me of the saying "never pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel", meaning the news media.

R.Mackey · 15th September 2009, 07:41 PM

Originally Posted by Congruentruth

Well, That's obvious. He wants to have a real debate.

What makes you think so?

Pat Curley has thrown his hat into the ring, in public. I'd lay odds that he is never contacted. If asked, if there actually is to be a debate, I'd consider it -- but I won't be.

Why do we think any debate is even anticpated? Because Charlie Sheen went on Alex Jones's radio and called out a bunch of talk show hosts? Because he invoked the name of Larry King? What? What is the proposal here?

Some months ago, I issued my own challenge, as part of the shows I did on Hardfire. This show was commented on by many "ranking" Truthers, so it certainly reached all the right people. Yet, to this day, not a single one of them has even attempted the Challenge. Only one even showed interest, and he fled without making a submission.

Some years ago I wrote an extensive, fully referenced whitepaper destroying Dr. Griffin, his beliefs, and his poor scholarship. He has a copy, I e-mailed him one at his request. Later he had a hard copy given to him despite his flustered protestation, and he didn't even read it (much like the works he criticizes). To this day, not a peep out of him. Not a correction, not a challenge, nothing. He hides in his hole, hoping the problems will just go away.

There are numerous other examples of Truthers ducking debates -- Dr. Griffin is a serial offender, so is Kevin Ryan, etc.

Likewise, none of them has produced a properly reviewed paper, and none has ever presented at a science conference. They attend conferences, like Mr. Gage running his little souvenir booth trolling for donations, but actually present some science? Heck, no. They know what would happen.

So, what are we to make of that? Why would anyone care about answering their stupid Challenges, but dismiss all the times they've defaulted? Why is Charlie special? What makes you think he really wants a discussion? Explain this.

CHF · 15th September 2009, 08:11 PM

I'm still trying to figure out why truthers think Charlie Sheen is relevant.

They refer to Charlie, Rosie, Jesse Ventura or Willy Nelson as though their opinions on 9/11 are more valid than anyone else's.

Why are we to believe this is the case? What do they bring to the table in terms of knowledge or expertise?

Grizzly Bear · 15th September 2009, 08:40 PM

Originally Posted by CHF

I'm still trying to figure out why truthers think Charlie Sheen is relevant.

They refer to Charlie, Rosie, Jesse Ventura or Willy Nelson as though their opinions on 9/11 are more valid than anyone else's.

Why are we to believe this is the case? What do they bring to the table in terms of knowledge or expertise?

Because many of them believe that if they are working in the fields of expertise involved or are famous celebrities they are -- in the words of bill smith -- "unassailably credible" so long as they agree with their fantasies.

911kongen · 15th September 2009, 09:33 PM

Originally Posted by R.Mackey

What makes you think so?

Pat Curley has thrown his hat into the ring, in public. I'd lay odds that he is never contacted. If asked, if there actually is to be a debate, I'd consider it -- but I won't be.

Why do we think any debate is even anticpated? Because Charlie Sheen went on Alex Jones's radio and called out a bunch of talk show hosts? Because he invoked the name of Larry King? What? What is the proposal here?

Some months ago, I issued my own challenge, as part of the shows I did on Hardfire. This show was commented on by many "ranking" Truthers, so it certainly reached all the right people. Yet, to this day, not a single one of them has even attempted the Challenge. Only one even showed interest, and he fled without making a submission.

Some years ago I wrote an extensive, fully referenced whitepaper destroying Dr. Griffin, his beliefs, and his poor scholarship. He has a copy, I e-mailed him one at his request. Later he had a hard copy given to him despite his flustered protestation, and he didn't even read it (much like the works he criticizes). To this day, not a peep out of him. Not a correction, not a challenge, nothing. He hides in his hole, hoping the problems will just go away.

There are numerous other examples of Truthers ducking debates -- Dr. Griffin is a serial offender, so is Kevin Ryan, etc.

Likewise, none of them has produced a properly reviewed paper, and none has ever presented at a science conference. They attend conferences, like Mr. Gage running his little souvenir booth trolling for donations, but actually present some science? Heck, no. They know what would happen.

So, what are we to make of that? Why would anyone care about answering their stupid Challenges, but dismiss all the times they've defaulted? Why is Charlie special? What makes you think he really wants a discussion? Explain this.

I see your argument MacKey! But I do think the best thing to do is just accept the challenge. THEN argue that they never accept anyway... And you have a challenge out your self! But I do think the debunkers is loosing ground to mainstream people if they dont accept challenges from the leaders in the "truth-movement"...

R.Mackey · 15th September 2009, 09:40 PM

Originally Posted by 911kongen

I see your argument MacKey! But I do think the best thing to do is just accept the challenge. THEN argue that they never accept anyway... And you have a challenge out your self! But I do think the debunkers is loosing ground to mainstream people if they dont accept challenges from the leaders in the "truth-movement"...

No, the best thing is not to just accept the challenge. The challenge is a sham. Again, if it gets serious, then maybe. This is far from serious as it is, and I'm amazed anyone can't see that.

You haven't actually gone through any of these. I have. They're a pain. Doubly so when the other side doesn't get their act together.

LashL · 15th September 2009, 09:50 PM

Originally Posted by 911kongen

I see your argument MacKey! But I do think the best thing to do is just accept the challenge. THEN argue that they never accept anyway... And you have a challenge out your self! But I do think the debunkers is loosing ground to mainstream people if the dont accept challenges from the leaders in the "truth-movement"...

Sheen is hardly a "leader" in the "truth movement" and his "challenge" is virtually meaningless. Sheen doesn't know a darned thing about science or any of the relevant sub-specialties, and he doesn't know a darned thing about anything relevant to the events of 9/11.

Alex Jones and Sheen deliberately punked the naive, faithful followers of the "truth movement" for their own purposes, and now they are just trying to save face after belatedly recognizing the spectacular failure that it was, by pretending to issue a "challenge" that they know full well is utterly meaningless. But they still plan on fooling the naive, faithful followers of the "truth movement".

The stupid, it burns.

911kongen · 15th September 2009, 10:24 PM

Originally Posted by R.Mackey

No, the best thing is not to just accept the challenge. The challenge is a sham. Again, if it gets serious, then maybe. This is far from serious as it is, and I'm amazed anyone can't see that.

You haven't actually gone through any of these. I have. They're a pain. Doubly so when the other side doesn't get their act together.

Dont jump the gun MacKey. I have gone through this! I have tried to debate 911-truthers here in Norway.. but they bail out! We have had some engineers and one from PRIO: Foreign and Security Policy Program that say WTC was an inside job. I have email them, and the person from PRIOR actually believed WTC had a concrete core!

R.Mackey · 15th September 2009, 10:31 PM

Well, then you know that jumping at the chance to debate every coked-up dropout knucklehead who wakes up one morning and decides the US Government is behind every evil thing in the universe is a waste of time.

Again, if it gets more serious, maybe. But it won't. You'll see.

911kongen · 15th September 2009, 11:13 PM

Originally Posted by R.Mackey

Well, then you know that jumping at the chance to debate every coked-up dropout knucklehead who wakes up one morning and decides the US Government is behind every evil thing in the universe is a waste of time.

Again, if it gets more serious, maybe. But it won't. You'll see.

MacKey, I know it wont get serious! BUT, and its a big BUT, 911-truthers dont see it like that. So I think the best thing to do is just accept it, and not let the truthers get the chance to say we bail out. I accept Sheens challenge to debate his "paper"! But I know it will not happen... That doesent matter, the point is that im not afraid to debate any truthers! And I dont think you are, and truthers dont understand your reasoning not to debate... There logic will be that you dont accept and are afraid!

R.Mackey · 15th September 2009, 11:17 PM

Originally Posted by 911kongen

MacKey, I know it wont get serious! BUT, and its a big BUT, 911-truthers dont see it like that. So I think the best thing to do is just accept it, and not let the truthers get the chance to say we bail out. I accept Sheens challenge to debate his "paper"! But I know it will not happen... That doesent matter, the point is that im not afraid to debate any truthers! And I dont think you are, and truthers dont understand your reasoning not to debate... There logic will be that you dont accept and are afraid!

See, you're trying to apply "logic." That's not going to work in this situation.

Truthers thrive on attention and personal abuse, and you're advocating giving it to them.

Hokulele · 15th September 2009, 11:18 PM

Originally Posted by 911kongen

MacKey, I know it wont get serious! BUT, and its a big BUT, 911-truthers dont see it like that.

So what?

911kongen · 15th September 2009, 11:29 PM

Originally Posted by R.Mackey

See, you're trying to apply "logic." That's not going to work in this situation.

Truthers thrive on attention and personal abuse, and you're advocating giving it to them.

I see your point! But is it not most devestating to the Truth-movement if You MacKey and Mark Roberts debate them on lets say Larry King, and not King him self? Everytime its a truthers getting his points out there, and a Host that dont know anything about 911. Truthers attention will not be getting bigger if you debate him on that show, and not the host. Im not saying we must personally try to get this on CNN. BUT if it gets there, we should have a voice!! Dont let the debunking be up to the Host! That never works...

R.Mackey · 15th September 2009, 11:39 PM

No. It won't have any effect at all. The Truthers aren't even smart enough to know when they're beaten. All they care about is seeing one of their own up in lights.

For example, Mark Roberts absolutely creamed Richard Gage on Hardfire (although, to be fair, most of the wounds were self-inflicted). Did that wipe him out? Of course not.

In just the last 24 hours, I responded to one Truther who has no idea what an integral is, what inertia is, or that gravitational potential energy is important to building collapses. And another Truther who thinks that nanothermite is somehow a silent explosive. Yet both of these people, complete ignoramuses, will plant their feet and tell me, a professional, degreed, and published scientist who has explained everything to them in simple terms, that I'm a complete idiot and I haven't refuted anything they say.

The Truth Movement is rife with such people. They are so incompetent that absolutely nothing you can do will change their minds. Even if Charlie himself actually conceded the debate, saying "OK, you convinced me, it was just the voices in my head talking, and 9/11 was not an Inside Job," the next day the rest of the Truthers would shun him, claim he was paid off or threatened, that it was really a hologram... you name it.

As I said, there is no point. I see nothing in this for me. The only tangible advantage would be if anything important hinged on this debate, say if policy was going to be decided on the outcome, or if millions and millions of people were on the fence, waiting to see and hear the arguments for the first time. It Just Ain't So. The only thing I have to gain is smacking around Charlie Sheen, and frankly, that just isn't worth much to me. He's not special. He's about the last person in the world I'd listen to in such matters.

Make it worth my time.

JoeyDonuts · 16th September 2009, 12:17 AM

The "fishsticks" episode of South Park (the one with Kanye West not getting the joke) has a pretty good example of this mindset in action.

Along with a marching army of Hassidic Jew robots.

I swear, sometimes I think that show is the smartest thing on television, albeit in a backhanded way.

911kongen · 16th September 2009, 12:36 AM

Originally Posted by R.Mackey

No. It won't have any effect at all. The Truthers aren't even smart enough to know when they're beaten. All they care about is seeing one of their own up in lights.

For example, Mark Roberts absolutely creamed Richard Gage on Hardfire (although, to be fair, most of the wounds were self-inflicted). Did that wipe him out? Of course not.

In just the last 24 hours, I responded to one Truther who has no idea what an integral is, what inertia is, or that gravitational potential energy is important to building collapses. And another Truther who thinks that nanothermite is somehow a silent explosive. Yet both of these people, complete ignoramuses, will plant their feet and tell me, a professional, degreed, and published scientist who has explained everything to them in simple terms, that I'm a complete idiot and I haven't refuted anything they say.

The Truth Movement is rife with such people. They are so incompetent that absolutely nothing you can do will change their minds. Even if Charlie himself actually conceded the debate, saying "OK, you convinced me, it was just the voices in my head talking, and 9/11 was not an Inside Job," the next day the rest of the Truthers would shun him, claim he was paid off or threatened, that it was really a hologram... you name it.

As I said, there is no point. I see nothing in this for me. The only tangible advantage would be if anything important hinged on this debate, say if policy was going to be decided on the outcome, or if millions and millions of people were on the fence, waiting to see and hear the arguments for the first time. It Just Ain't So. The only thing I have to gain is smacking around Charlie Sheen, and frankly, that just isn't worth much to me. He's not special. He's about the last person in the world I'd listen to in such matters.

Make it worth my time.

Well, I dont think the debate will matter to the "truthers", but it will matter to the mainstream watching, lets say Larry king... And to the familys that have lost someone on that tragic day.. Dont we all think its annoying to watch a truther debating a Tv-host that dont know anything? Its way better if the truther is beaten in the head with science and logic! It will not help the truther, but the people watching.. Thats the point in debating! Truthers will NEVER change their mind on Air, and probably not later.. but thats not the point in debating them!

bill smith · 16th September 2009, 12:50 AM

Originally Posted by R.Mackey

No, the best thing is not to just accept the challenge. The challenge is a sham. Again, if it gets serious, then maybe. This is far from serious as it is, and I'm amazed anyone can't see that.

You haven't actually gone through any of these. I have. They're a pain. Doubly so when the other side doesn't get their act together.

I can imagine that you are reticent to appear on a show like Larry King. It would obviously be a huge risk because if for some reason it did not go well you would advance the progress of the Truth Movement by months if not cause an instant meltdown of the government story.

This is not a criticism. just a statement of fact.

dtugg · 16th September 2009, 12:56 AM

Originally Posted by bill smith

This is not a criticism. just a statement of fact.

You don't know what a fact is, bs.

EnJaySee · 16th September 2009, 01:12 AM

Originally Posted by R.Mackey

No. It won't have any effect at all. The Truthers aren't even smart enough to know when they're beaten. All they care about is seeing one of their own up in lights.

For example, Mark Roberts absolutely creamed Richard Gage on Hardfire (although, to be fair, most of the wounds were self-inflicted). Did that wipe him out? Of course not.

In just the last 24 hours, I responded to one Truther who has no idea what an integral is, what inertia is, or that gravitational potential energy is important to building collapses. And another Truther who thinks that nanothermite is somehow a silent explosive. Yet both of these people, complete ignoramuses, will plant their feet and tell me, a professional, degreed, and published scientist who has explained everything to them in simple terms, that I'm a complete idiot and I haven't refuted anything they say.

The Truth Movement is rife with such people. They are so incompetent that absolutely nothing you can do will change their minds. Even if Charlie himself actually conceded the debate, saying "OK, you convinced me, it was just the voices in my head talking, and 9/11 was not an Inside Job," the next day the rest of the Truthers would shun him, claim he was paid off or threatened, that it was really a hologram... you name it.

As I said, there is no point. I see nothing in this for me. The only tangible advantage would be if anything important hinged on this debate, say if policy was going to be decided on the outcome, or if millions and millions of people were on the fence, waiting to see and hear the arguments for the first time. It Just Ain't So. The only thing I have to gain is smacking around Charlie Sheen, and frankly, that just isn't worth much to me. He's not special. He's about the last person in the world I'd listen to in such matters.

Make it worth my time.

I slightly disagree with this. Like it or not, Sheen is a public personality and as such, has the ability to draw public attention to an issue. Hell, a lot of celebrities do this in one way or another. Just look at the celebrities who support PETA. Or how about the storm the Dixie Chicks caused when they spoke up against the Bush administration. A lot of them use their fame to put the spotlight on an issue, controversial or not.

You touched on it a little in this post, but if there were a few million people sitting on the fence on this issue and you did have a public debate where you smack Sheen's arguments into dust, wouldn't that convince those people that the TM is a sham? Isn't that a good thing?

You're 100% right when you say you won't convince the hard core truthers. After lurking in this forum for about a year, I don't think this is about convincing the truthers they're wrong anymore, it's about informing and educating people who don't have the time to do their own research and who are undecided on the issue. Hell, that's how I found this place. A friend of mine who had never spoken or even thought about 9/11 came to me one day last year and told me to watch LC and it was clear to me he was beginning to be swayed by it. I straight away did my own investigoogling and have since brought him back into the side of Real Truth and we've never spoken about it again. Since Sheen's public comments, how many public personalities have stood up and told him he's wrong? I found this comment in reuters:

Quote:

"We can no longer allow these cowards and shills to contaminate the reservoirs
of truth. In addition to their slanderous folly, they have ignored my very
public challenge to a debate on Larry King Live. If these cockroaches had but
one shred of courage, they would embrace this opportunity," states Sheen.

Granted Reuters took that from the Alex Jones Show, it's still there in Reuters and Sheen's public comments are out there in the public. If no one stands up against him, he can and will say no one dared to debate him, therefore he's onto something and there must be some truth to what he said. That should not be allowed.

At the very least you can increase the number of people who'll tell them to shut the hell up. And from where I'm sitting, I think that's a good thing.

911kongen · 16th September 2009, 01:16 AM

Originally Posted by bill smith

I can imagine that you are reticent to appear on a show like Larry King. It would obviously be a huge risk because if for some reason it did not go well you would advance the progress of the Truth Movement by months if not cause an instant meltdown of the government story.

This is not a criticism. just a statement of fact.

I only have one thing to say;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5x_-IoeSB-A&NR=1

NOTE: NSFW

bill smith · 16th September 2009, 01:22 AM

Originally Posted by 911kongen

I only have one thing to say;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5x_-IoeSB-A&NR=1

NOTE: NSFW

Tell me it ain't so then ? Now you maybe understand what a knife-edge this really is for peple like RM and the government story....but maybe you think that they have nothing to worry about ?

911kongen · 16th September 2009, 01:29 AM

Originally Posted by bill smith

Tell me it ain't so then ? Now you maybe undertand what a knife-edge this really is for peple like RM and the government story....but maybe you think that they have nothing to worry about ?

We know it will go a lot worse if Just a TV-host debates a truther than lets say MacKey or Roberts.. AND normaly its a TV-host debating this Nuts... Still is the truth movement going down! MacKey cant do a worse job than a TV-host. So we have everything to win on him or roberts debating!

bill smith · 16th September 2009, 01:40 AM

Originally Posted by 911kongen

We know it will go a lot worse if Just a TV-host debates a truther than lets say MacKey or Roberts.. AND normaly its a TV-host debating this Nuts... Still is the truth movement going down! MacKey cant do a worse job than a TV-host. So we have everything to win on him or roberts debating!

I will be very happy to see any ranking debunker appear against Charlie Sheen on mainsteam TV like Larry King Live. The more senior the better. If we take heads we would like them to be big ones.

911kongen · 16th September 2009, 01:52 AM

Originally Posted by bill smith

I will be very happy to see any ranking debunker appear against Charlie Sheen on mainsteam TV like Larry King Live. The more senior the better. If we take heads we would ike them to be big ones.

Than can you call in to Alex Jones show and ask if Sheen is willing to debate Mark Roberts or Ryan MacKey? I bet he says yes, but it will never happen.. and thats not because Ryan or Mark said no... Sheen is going to bail out!! Just like Griffin!!

bill smith · 16th September 2009, 02:01 AM

Originally Posted by 911kongen

Than can you call in to Alex Jones show and ask if Sheen is willing to debate Mark Roberts or Ryan MacKey? I bet he says yes, but it will never happen.. and thats not because Ryan or Mark said no... Sheen is going to bail out!! Just like Griffin!!

The Challenge has been thrown down. Now it's up to your guys to pick it up. RM or another (ranking) debunker can easily send the email accepting the Challenge and preparations can begin.

Otherwise Charlie (and the Truth Movement) are going to have an awful big stick to beat you with.

MysteryMammal · 16th September 2009, 02:06 AM

Originally Posted by bill smith

I can imagine that you are reticent to appear on a show like Larry King. It would obviously be a huge risk because if for some reason it did not go well you would advance the progress of the Truth Movement by months if not cause an instant meltdown of the government story.

This is not a criticism. just a statement of fact.

Actually, it's speculation. Speculation is not fact.

As for advancing the truth movement...

911kongen · 16th September 2009, 02:24 AM

Originally Posted by bill smith

The challenge has been thrown down. Now it's up to your guys to pick it up. RM or another (ranking) debunker can easily send the email accepting the Challenge and preparations can begin.

Otherwise Charlie (and the Truth Movement) are going to have an awful big stick to beat you with.

Personally im a bit disappointed that the well know debunkers is starting to give up conspiracy nuts like Griffin. Nuts say one thing, and does something else! I know Sheen will do the same... we debunkers see that, but not people like you. You see it as a victory!

But thats not the point i debating Sheen. The point in debating Sheen is getting the facts out, and not let Sheen have a rant on a TV-show like Larry King... We need the people and familys of 911 to here our voice allso!

bill smith · 16th September 2009, 02:34 AM

Originally Posted by 911kongen

Personally im a bit disappointed that the well know debunkers is starting to give up conspiracy nuts like Griffin. Nuts say one thing, and does something else! I know Sheen will do the same... we debunkers see that, but not people like you. You see it as a victory!

But thats not the point i debating Sheen. The point in debating Sheen is getting the facts out, and not let Sheen have a rant on a TV-show like Larry King... We need the people and familys of 911 to here our voice allso!

I agree absolutely that he point is to get the facts out to the wider population and jump-start the National debate. Many 9/11 families are Truthers too. [the rest deleted in the interests of staying on topic]

MysteryMammal · 16th September 2009, 02:58 AM

Originally Posted by bill smith

I agree absolutely that he point is to get the facts out to the wider population and jump-start the National debate. Many 9/11 families are Truthers too. 400 family members already brought a class-action murder suit against Bush and Co in 2004. The warrents were even served on Bush personally. But a friendly judge dismissed the case on the grounds of 'sovereign immunity '....(the King is exempt from prosecution). But you must have read about this in the papers ? It's another story anyway for another day.

I have not read about this. Linky, please?

bill smith · 16th September 2009, 03:08 AM

Originally Posted by MysteryMammal

I have not read about this. Linky, please?

Look up ' Stanley Hilton lawsuit ' but start a new thread if you want to discuss it please.

JoeyDonuts · 16th September 2009, 04:32 AM

Originally Posted by bill smith

I agree absolutely that he point is to get the facts out to the wider population and jump-start the National debate.

You've had how many chances to show your cards and get this thing moving again?

And now you're hitching your wagon to Charlie Sheen.

Must be a little disheartening to know your collective efforts won't ever amount to so much as a bump on the road of history.

So, what's your plan of action when nobody pays attention to Uncle Charlie, and the National Debate over 9/11 never starts the way you want it to?

Oh, the hell with it. Just blame "THEM." It's so much easier when you don't have to think that much.

bill smith · 16th September 2009, 04:35 AM

Originally Posted by JoeyDonuts

You've had how many chances to show your cards and get this thing moving again?

And now you're hitching your wagon to Charlie Sheen.

Must be a little disheartening to know your collective efforts won't ever amount to so much as a bump on the road of history.

So, what's your plan of action when nobody pays attention to Uncle Charlie, and the National Debate over 9/11 never starts the way you want it to?

Oh, the hell with it. Just blame "THEM." It's so much easier when you don't have to think that much.

This is a smouldering fire Joey. We just want to throw some petrol on it and let the fires of Truth rage.

JoeyDonuts · 16th September 2009, 05:02 AM

Originally Posted by bill smith

This is a smouldering fire Joey. We just want to throw some petrol on it and let the fires of Truth rage.

Yawn. You're not even a sputtering half-stomped cigarette butt laying in a gutter. The last sensible members of your movement got embarrassed and moved on some time ago.

You're fringe, to be filed right alongside Flat Earth, JFK, Roswell, crop circles, Chupacabra, and every other pseudoscientific pile of bunkum out there.

The interesting thing about your arguments in particular is that you tend to skip right back to this hyperbole about the size and unstoppable raging fury of your "movement" after someone shows you unequivocally how your position is scientifically without merit.

So, though you may manage to attract the violent, the unstable, and the occassional celebrity, you still aren't attracting reputable scientists, politicians, historians, ex-military, and the like. Notice I said reputable. That means no trotting out Dr. Jones, Cynthia McKinney, Van Jones, David Ray Griffin, Korey Rowe, April Gallop and such.

bill smith · 16th September 2009, 05:27 AM

Originally Posted by JoeyDonuts

Yawn. You're not even a sputtering half-stomped cigarette butt laying in a gutter. The last sensible members of your movement got embarrassed and moved on some time ago.

You're fringe, to be filed right alongside Flat Earth, JFK, Roswell, crop circles, Chupacabra, and every other pseudoscientific pile of bunkum out there.

The interesting thing about your arguments in particular is that you tend to skip right back to this hyperbole about the size and unstoppable raging fury of your "movement" after someone shows you unequivocally how your position is scientifically without merit.

So, though you may manage to attract the violent, the unstable, and the occassional celebrity, you still aren't attracting reputable scientists, politicians, historians, ex-military, and the like. Notice I said reputable. That means no trotting out Dr. Jones, Cynthia McKinney, Van Jones, David Ray Griffin, Korey Rowe, April Gallop and such.

Oh well we'll just have to keep plugging on. No sweat.

JoeyDonuts · 16th September 2009, 05:33 AM

Originally Posted by bill smith

Oh well we'll just have to keep plugging on. No sweat.

Hell of a way to waste a life.

15th September 2009, 02:42 PM	#121
bill smith Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 8,408	Video with Charlie Sheen who makes a video address to the President about 2/3 of the way through. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyKR2...e=channel_page
bill smith Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 8,408	__________________ Think WTC7 - You cannot make the four corners of a table fall together unless you cut the four legs together A kitchen table judgement on a world scale is enough * To Citizens: 'There comes a time when silence is betrayal'

15th September 2009, 02:49 PM	#122
Congruentruth Banned Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 50	Originally Posted by WildCat What's stopping him from signing up here? Well, That's obvious. He wants to have a real debate.
Congruentruth Banned Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 50

15th September 2009, 02:52 PM	#123
bill smith Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 8,408	Originally Posted by Congruentruth Well, That's obvious. He wants to have a real debate. lol
bill smith Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 8,408	__________________ Think WTC7 - You cannot make the four corners of a table fall together unless you cut the four legs together A kitchen table judgement on a world scale is enough * To Citizens: 'There comes a time when silence is betrayal'

15th September 2009, 02:57 PM	#124
bill smith Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 8,408	Is that you Charlie ?
bill smith Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 8,408	__________________ Think WTC7 - You cannot make the four corners of a table fall together unless you cut the four legs together A kitchen table judgement on a world scale is enough * To Citizens: 'There comes a time when silence is betrayal'

15th September 2009, 04:52 PM	#125
beachnut Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Dog House Posts: 19,911	Originally Posted by 911kongen ... I think it is important to answer to persons getting on like Fox News and CNN. Ignoring them is a mistake... But MacKey, I respect that you dont agree! I just whanted to know why.. There is no debate, Sheen has moronic ideas on 911. He has no evidence and not a single person can help support his failed ideas on 911. Sheen has these ideas due to his complete ignorance on the subject. People having problems seeing Sheen is full of lies on 911 have serious problems thinking for themselves. Charlie is self-debunking since his 911 views are based on ignorance, hearsay, lies and delusions. No one has evidence to help him. Quote: I love Sheen because he's a man unencumbered by self-awareness. Think about it: The world's most famous clueless druggie, gambling-addicted, whore-banger thinks he's uncovered a conspiracy and we should all believe him. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,549904,00.html ... all Sheen lacks is evidence.
	Last edited by beachnut; 15th September 2009 at 04:57 PM.

15th September 2009, 06:02 PM	#126
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 49,146	Originally Posted by Myriad I'm sure you could humiliate Charlie Sheen on all the conspiracy talking points, especially the technical ones. I'm also equally sure that he wouldn't care. His goal in any "debate" would be to look and act cooler and more fun to hang out with than you, and being an experienced actor and well-known celebrity he'd probably succeed. Then, six months later when he tells the gossip interviewer from Parade magazine, "Oh yes, I'm very serious about exposing the 9/11 cover-up. In fact I debated a government engineer on it, and he couldn't refute a single point" -- who's going to set the record straight, and how? Myriad's Second Law: Before assuming you can win, make sure you know what the game is. Respectfully, Myriad Reminds me of the saying "never pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel", meaning the news media.

15th September 2009, 07:41 PM	#127
R.Mackey Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: The armpit of L.A. Posts: 7,857	Originally Posted by Congruentruth Well, That's obvious. He wants to have a real debate. What makes you think so? Pat Curley has thrown his hat into the ring, in public. I'd lay odds that he is never contacted. If asked, if there actually is to be a debate, I'd consider it -- but I won't be. Why do we think any debate is even anticpated? Because Charlie Sheen went on Alex Jones's radio and called out a bunch of talk show hosts? Because he invoked the name of Larry King? What? What is the proposal here? Some months ago, I issued my own challenge, as part of the shows I did on Hardfire. This show was commented on by many "ranking" Truthers, so it certainly reached all the right people. Yet, to this day, not a single one of them has even attempted the Challenge. Only one even showed interest, and he fled without making a submission. Some years ago I wrote an extensive, fully referenced whitepaper destroying Dr. Griffin, his beliefs, and his poor scholarship. He has a copy, I e-mailed him one at his request. Later he had a hard copy given to him despite his flustered protestation, and he didn't even read it (much like the works he criticizes). To this day, not a peep out of him. Not a correction, not a challenge, nothing. He hides in his hole, hoping the problems will just go away. There are numerous other examples of Truthers ducking debates -- Dr. Griffin is a serial offender, so is Kevin Ryan, etc. Likewise, none of them has produced a properly reviewed paper, and none has ever presented at a science conference. They attend conferences, like Mr. Gage running his little souvenir booth trolling for donations, but actually present some science? Heck, no. They know what would happen. So, what are we to make of that? Why would anyone care about answering their stupid Challenges, but dismiss all the times they've defaulted? Why is Charlie special? What makes you think he really wants a discussion? Explain this.
	__________________ "Nothing real can defeat us. Nothing unreal exists." -B. Banzai VT VENIANT OMNES Last edited by R.Mackey; 15th September 2009 at 07:43 PM.

15th September 2009, 08:11 PM	#128
CHF Illuminator Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Toronto Posts: 3,875	I'm still trying to figure out why truthers think Charlie Sheen is relevant. They refer to Charlie, Rosie, Jesse Ventura or Willy Nelson as though their opinions on 9/11 are more valid than anyone else's. Why are we to believe this is the case? What do they bring to the table in terms of knowledge or expertise?

15th September 2009, 08:40 PM	#129
Grizzly Bear このマスクによっ Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 5,690	Originally Posted by CHF I'm still trying to figure out why truthers think Charlie Sheen is relevant. They refer to Charlie, Rosie, Jesse Ventura or Willy Nelson as though their opinions on 9/11 are more valid than anyone else's. Why are we to believe this is the case? What do they bring to the table in terms of knowledge or expertise? Because many of them believe that if they are working in the fields of expertise involved or are famous celebrities they are -- in the words of bill smith -- "unassailably credible" so long as they agree with their fantasies.
Grizzly Bear このマスクによっ Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 5,690	__________________ Graduation on 8/13/2011 8D

15th September 2009, 09:33 PM	#130
911kongen Critical Thinker Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 363	Originally Posted by R.Mackey What makes you think so? Pat Curley has thrown his hat into the ring, in public. I'd lay odds that he is never contacted. If asked, if there actually is to be a debate, I'd consider it -- but I won't be. Why do we think any debate is even anticpated? Because Charlie Sheen went on Alex Jones's radio and called out a bunch of talk show hosts? Because he invoked the name of Larry King? What? What is the proposal here? Some months ago, I issued my own challenge, as part of the shows I did on Hardfire. This show was commented on by many "ranking" Truthers, so it certainly reached all the right people. Yet, to this day, not a single one of them has even attempted the Challenge. Only one even showed interest, and he fled without making a submission. Some years ago I wrote an extensive, fully referenced whitepaper destroying Dr. Griffin, his beliefs, and his poor scholarship. He has a copy, I e-mailed him one at his request. Later he had a hard copy given to him despite his flustered protestation, and he didn't even read it (much like the works he criticizes). To this day, not a peep out of him. Not a correction, not a challenge, nothing. He hides in his hole, hoping the problems will just go away. There are numerous other examples of Truthers ducking debates -- Dr. Griffin is a serial offender, so is Kevin Ryan, etc. Likewise, none of them has produced a properly reviewed paper, and none has ever presented at a science conference. They attend conferences, like Mr. Gage running his little souvenir booth trolling for donations, but actually present some science? Heck, no. They know what would happen. So, what are we to make of that? Why would anyone care about answering their stupid Challenges, but dismiss all the times they've defaulted? Why is Charlie special? What makes you think he really wants a discussion? Explain this. I see your argument MacKey! But I do think the best thing to do is just accept the challenge. THEN argue that they never accept anyway... And you have a challenge out your self! But I do think the debunkers is loosing ground to mainstream people if they dont accept challenges from the leaders in the "truth-movement"...
	Last edited by 911kongen; 15th September 2009 at 09:35 PM.

15th September 2009, 09:40 PM	#131
R.Mackey Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: The armpit of L.A. Posts: 7,857	Originally Posted by 911kongen I see your argument MacKey! But I do think the best thing to do is just accept the challenge. THEN argue that they never accept anyway... And you have a challenge out your self! But I do think the debunkers is loosing ground to mainstream people if they dont accept challenges from the leaders in the "truth-movement"... No, the best thing is not to just accept the challenge. The challenge is a sham. Again, if it gets serious, then maybe. This is far from serious as it is, and I'm amazed anyone can't see that. You haven't actually gone through any of these. I have. They're a pain. Doubly so when the other side doesn't get their act together.
	__________________ "Nothing real can defeat us. Nothing unreal exists." -B. Banzai VT VENIANT OMNES

15th September 2009, 09:50 PM	#132
LashL Goddess of Legaltainment™ Administrator Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 26,273	Originally Posted by 911kongen I see your argument MacKey! But I do think the best thing to do is just accept the challenge. THEN argue that they never accept anyway... And you have a challenge out your self! But I do think the debunkers is loosing ground to mainstream people if the dont accept challenges from the leaders in the "truth-movement"... Sheen is hardly a "leader" in the "truth movement" and his "challenge" is virtually meaningless. Sheen doesn't know a darned thing about science or any of the relevant sub-specialties, and he doesn't know a darned thing about anything relevant to the events of 9/11. Alex Jones and Sheen deliberately punked the naive, faithful followers of the "truth movement" for their own purposes, and now they are just trying to save face after belatedly recognizing the spectacular failure that it was, by pretending to issue a "challenge" that they know full well is utterly meaningless. But they still plan on fooling the naive, faithful followers of the "truth movement". The stupid, it burns.
	Last edited by LashL; 15th September 2009 at 09:52 PM.

15th September 2009, 10:24 PM	#133
911kongen Critical Thinker Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 363	Originally Posted by R.Mackey No, the best thing is not to just accept the challenge. The challenge is a sham. Again, if it gets serious, then maybe. This is far from serious as it is, and I'm amazed anyone can't see that. You haven't actually gone through any of these. I have. They're a pain. Doubly so when the other side doesn't get their act together. Dont jump the gun MacKey. I have gone through this! I have tried to debate 911-truthers here in Norway.. but they bail out! We have had some engineers and one from PRIO: Foreign and Security Policy Program that say WTC was an inside job. I have email them, and the person from PRIOR actually believed WTC had a concrete core!

15th September 2009, 10:31 PM	#134
R.Mackey Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: The armpit of L.A. Posts: 7,857	Well, then you know that jumping at the chance to debate every coked-up dropout knucklehead who wakes up one morning and decides the US Government is behind every evil thing in the universe is a waste of time. Again, if it gets more serious, maybe. But it won't. You'll see.
	__________________ "Nothing real can defeat us. Nothing unreal exists." -B. Banzai VT VENIANT OMNES

15th September 2009, 11:13 PM	#135
911kongen Critical Thinker Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 363	Originally Posted by R.Mackey Well, then you know that jumping at the chance to debate every coked-up dropout knucklehead who wakes up one morning and decides the US Government is behind every evil thing in the universe is a waste of time. Again, if it gets more serious, maybe. But it won't. You'll see. MacKey, I know it wont get serious! BUT, and its a big BUT, 911-truthers dont see it like that. So I think the best thing to do is just accept it, and not let the truthers get the chance to say we bail out. I accept Sheens challenge to debate his "paper"! But I know it will not happen... That doesent matter, the point is that im not afraid to debate any truthers! And I dont think you are, and truthers dont understand your reasoning not to debate... There logic will be that you dont accept and are afraid!

15th September 2009, 11:17 PM	#136
R.Mackey Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: The armpit of L.A. Posts: 7,857	Originally Posted by 911kongen MacKey, I know it wont get serious! BUT, and its a big BUT, 911-truthers dont see it like that. So I think the best thing to do is just accept it, and not let the truthers get the chance to say we bail out. I accept Sheens challenge to debate his "paper"! But I know it will not happen... That doesent matter, the point is that im not afraid to debate any truthers! And I dont think you are, and truthers dont understand your reasoning not to debate... There logic will be that you dont accept and are afraid! See, you're trying to apply "logic." That's not going to work in this situation. Truthers thrive on attention and personal abuse, and you're advocating giving it to them.
	__________________ "Nothing real can defeat us. Nothing unreal exists." -B. Banzai VT VENIANT OMNES

15th September 2009, 11:18 PM	#137
Hokulele Official Nemesis Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Trying to decide whether to set defenses against an army, or against mole rats. Posts: 27,275	Originally Posted by 911kongen MacKey, I know it wont get serious! BUT, and its a big BUT, 911-truthers dont see it like that. So what?
	__________________ Yvette: "Blasty! Blasty! Blasty!" Some person: "Why did you shoot that?" Yvette: "Blasty! Blasty! Blasty!" - Tragic Monkey

15th September 2009, 11:29 PM	#138
911kongen Critical Thinker Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 363	Originally Posted by R.Mackey See, you're trying to apply "logic." That's not going to work in this situation. Truthers thrive on attention and personal abuse, and you're advocating giving it to them. I see your point! But is it not most devestating to the Truth-movement if You MacKey and Mark Roberts debate them on lets say Larry King, and not King him self? Everytime its a truthers getting his points out there, and a Host that dont know anything about 911. Truthers attention will not be getting bigger if you debate him on that show, and not the host. Im not saying we must personally try to get this on CNN. BUT if it gets there, we should have a voice!! Dont let the debunking be up to the Host! That never works...
	Last edited by 911kongen; 15th September 2009 at 11:31 PM.

15th September 2009, 11:39 PM	#139
R.Mackey Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: The armpit of L.A. Posts: 7,857	No. It won't have any effect at all. The Truthers aren't even smart enough to know when they're beaten. All they care about is seeing one of their own up in lights. For example, Mark Roberts absolutely creamed Richard Gage on Hardfire (although, to be fair, most of the wounds were self-inflicted). Did that wipe him out? Of course not. In just the last 24 hours, I responded to one Truther who has no idea what an integral is, what inertia is, or that gravitational potential energy is important to building collapses. And another Truther who thinks that nanothermite is somehow a silent explosive. Yet both of these people, complete ignoramuses, will plant their feet and tell me, a professional, degreed, and published scientist who has explained everything to them in simple terms, that I'm a complete idiot and I haven't refuted anything they say. The Truth Movement is rife with such people. They are so incompetent that absolutely nothing you can do will change their minds. Even if Charlie himself actually conceded the debate, saying "OK, you convinced me, it was just the voices in my head talking, and 9/11 was not an Inside Job," the next day the rest of the Truthers would shun him, claim he was paid off or threatened, that it was really a hologram... you name it. As I said, there is no point. I see nothing in this for me. The only tangible advantage would be if anything important hinged on this debate, say if policy was going to be decided on the outcome, or if millions and millions of people were on the fence, waiting to see and hear the arguments for the first time. It Just Ain't So. The only thing I have to gain is smacking around Charlie Sheen, and frankly, that just isn't worth much to me. He's not special. He's about the last person in the world I'd listen to in such matters. Make it worth my time.
	__________________ "Nothing real can defeat us. Nothing unreal exists." -B. Banzai VT VENIANT OMNES

16th September 2009, 12:17 AM	#140
JoeyDonuts Frequencies Not Known To Normals Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Parts Unknown Posts: 10,636	The "fishsticks" episode of South Park (the one with Kanye West not getting the joke) has a pretty good example of this mindset in action. Along with a marching army of Hassidic Jew robots. I swear, sometimes I think that show is the smartest thing on television, albeit in a backhanded way.
	__________________ _{EXIT STAGE LEFT! EXIT STAGE RIGHT! THERE IS NO PLACE TO RUN; ALL THE FUSES IN THE EXIT SIGNS HAVE BEEN BURNED OUT!}

16th September 2009, 12:36 AM	#141
911kongen Critical Thinker Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 363	Originally Posted by R.Mackey No. It won't have any effect at all. The Truthers aren't even smart enough to know when they're beaten. All they care about is seeing one of their own up in lights. For example, Mark Roberts absolutely creamed Richard Gage on Hardfire (although, to be fair, most of the wounds were self-inflicted). Did that wipe him out? Of course not. In just the last 24 hours, I responded to one Truther who has no idea what an integral is, what inertia is, or that gravitational potential energy is important to building collapses. And another Truther who thinks that nanothermite is somehow a silent explosive. Yet both of these people, complete ignoramuses, will plant their feet and tell me, a professional, degreed, and published scientist who has explained everything to them in simple terms, that I'm a complete idiot and I haven't refuted anything they say. The Truth Movement is rife with such people. They are so incompetent that absolutely nothing you can do will change their minds. Even if Charlie himself actually conceded the debate, saying "OK, you convinced me, it was just the voices in my head talking, and 9/11 was not an Inside Job," the next day the rest of the Truthers would shun him, claim he was paid off or threatened, that it was really a hologram... you name it. As I said, there is no point. I see nothing in this for me. The only tangible advantage would be if anything important hinged on this debate, say if policy was going to be decided on the outcome, or if millions and millions of people were on the fence, waiting to see and hear the arguments for the first time. It Just Ain't So. The only thing I have to gain is smacking around Charlie Sheen, and frankly, that just isn't worth much to me. He's not special. He's about the last person in the world I'd listen to in such matters. Make it worth my time. Well, I dont think the debate will matter to the "truthers", but it will matter to the mainstream watching, lets say Larry king... And to the familys that have lost someone on that tragic day.. Dont we all think its annoying to watch a truther debating a Tv-host that dont know anything? Its way better if the truther is beaten in the head with science and logic! It will not help the truther, but the people watching.. Thats the point in debating! Truthers will NEVER change their mind on Air, and probably not later.. but thats not the point in debating them!

16th September 2009, 12:50 AM	#142
bill smith Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 8,408	Originally Posted by R.Mackey No, the best thing is not to just accept the challenge. The challenge is a sham. Again, if it gets serious, then maybe. This is far from serious as it is, and I'm amazed anyone can't see that. You haven't actually gone through any of these. I have. They're a pain. Doubly so when the other side doesn't get their act together. I can imagine that you are reticent to appear on a show like Larry King. It would obviously be a huge risk because if for some reason it did not go well you would advance the progress of the Truth Movement by months if not cause an instant meltdown of the government story. This is not a criticism. just a statement of fact.
bill smith Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 8,408	__________________ Think WTC7 - You cannot make the four corners of a table fall together unless you cut the four legs together A kitchen table judgement on a world scale is enough * To Citizens: 'There comes a time when silence is betrayal' Last edited by bill smith; 16th September 2009 at 01:00 AM.

16th September 2009, 12:56 AM	#143
dtugg Banned Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: NWO headquarters Posts: 7,898	Originally Posted by bill smith This is not a criticism. just a statement of fact. You don't know what a fact is, bs.

16th September 2009, 01:12 AM	#144
EnJaySee Student Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 47	Originally Posted by R.Mackey No. It won't have any effect at all. The Truthers aren't even smart enough to know when they're beaten. All they care about is seeing one of their own up in lights. For example, Mark Roberts absolutely creamed Richard Gage on Hardfire (although, to be fair, most of the wounds were self-inflicted). Did that wipe him out? Of course not. In just the last 24 hours, I responded to one Truther who has no idea what an integral is, what inertia is, or that gravitational potential energy is important to building collapses. And another Truther who thinks that nanothermite is somehow a silent explosive. Yet both of these people, complete ignoramuses, will plant their feet and tell me, a professional, degreed, and published scientist who has explained everything to them in simple terms, that I'm a complete idiot and I haven't refuted anything they say. The Truth Movement is rife with such people. They are so incompetent that absolutely nothing you can do will change their minds. Even if Charlie himself actually conceded the debate, saying "OK, you convinced me, it was just the voices in my head talking, and 9/11 was not an Inside Job," the next day the rest of the Truthers would shun him, claim he was paid off or threatened, that it was really a hologram... you name it. As I said, there is no point. I see nothing in this for me. The only tangible advantage would be if anything important hinged on this debate, say if policy was going to be decided on the outcome, or if millions and millions of people were on the fence, waiting to see and hear the arguments for the first time. It Just Ain't So. The only thing I have to gain is smacking around Charlie Sheen, and frankly, that just isn't worth much to me. He's not special. He's about the last person in the world I'd listen to in such matters. Make it worth my time. I slightly disagree with this. Like it or not, Sheen is a public personality and as such, has the ability to draw public attention to an issue. Hell, a lot of celebrities do this in one way or another. Just look at the celebrities who support PETA. Or how about the storm the Dixie Chicks caused when they spoke up against the Bush administration. A lot of them use their fame to put the spotlight on an issue, controversial or not. You touched on it a little in this post, but if there were a few million people sitting on the fence on this issue and you did have a public debate where you smack Sheen's arguments into dust, wouldn't that convince those people that the TM is a sham? Isn't that a good thing? You're 100% right when you say you won't convince the hard core truthers. After lurking in this forum for about a year, I don't think this is about convincing the truthers they're wrong anymore, it's about informing and educating people who don't have the time to do their own research and who are undecided on the issue. Hell, that's how I found this place. A friend of mine who had never spoken or even thought about 9/11 came to me one day last year and told me to watch LC and it was clear to me he was beginning to be swayed by it. I straight away did my own investigoogling and have since brought him back into the side of Real Truth and we've never spoken about it again. Since Sheen's public comments, how many public personalities have stood up and told him he's wrong? I found this comment in reuters: Quote: "We can no longer allow these cowards and shills to contaminate the reservoirs of truth. In addition to their slanderous folly, they have ignored my very public challenge to a debate on Larry King Live. If these cockroaches had but one shred of courage, they would embrace this opportunity," states Sheen. Granted Reuters took that from the Alex Jones Show, it's still there in Reuters and Sheen's public comments are out there in the public. If no one stands up against him, he can and will say no one dared to debate him, therefore he's onto something and there must be some truth to what he said. That should not be allowed. At the very least you can increase the number of people who'll tell them to shut the hell up. And from where I'm sitting, I think that's a good thing.
EnJaySee Student Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 47

16th September 2009, 01:16 AM	#145
911kongen Critical Thinker Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 363	Originally Posted by bill smith I can imagine that you are reticent to appear on a show like Larry King. It would obviously be a huge risk because if for some reason it did not go well you would advance the progress of the Truth Movement by months if not cause an instant meltdown of the government story. This is not a criticism. just a statement of fact. I only have one thing to say; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5x_-IoeSB-A&NR=1 NOTE: NSFW
	Last edited by Locknar; 20th September 2009 at 02:07 PM. Reason: Added NSFW comment (language)

16th September 2009, 01:22 AM	#146
bill smith Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 8,408	Originally Posted by 911kongen I only have one thing to say; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5x_-IoeSB-A&NR=1 NOTE: NSFW Tell me it ain't so then ? Now you maybe understand what a knife-edge this really is for peple like RM and the government story....but maybe you think that they have nothing to worry about ?
bill smith Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 8,408	__________________ Think WTC7 - You cannot make the four corners of a table fall together unless you cut the four legs together A kitchen table judgement on a world scale is enough * To Citizens: 'There comes a time when silence is betrayal' Last edited by Locknar; 20th September 2009 at 02:08 PM.

16th September 2009, 01:29 AM	#147
911kongen Critical Thinker Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 363	Originally Posted by bill smith Tell me it ain't so then ? Now you maybe undertand what a knife-edge this really is for peple like RM and the government story....but maybe you think that they have nothing to worry about ? We know it will go a lot worse if Just a TV-host debates a truther than lets say MacKey or Roberts.. AND normaly its a TV-host debating this Nuts... Still is the truth movement going down! MacKey cant do a worse job than a TV-host. So we have everything to win on him or roberts debating!

16th September 2009, 01:40 AM	#148
bill smith Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 8,408	Originally Posted by 911kongen We know it will go a lot worse if Just a TV-host debates a truther than lets say MacKey or Roberts.. AND normaly its a TV-host debating this Nuts... Still is the truth movement going down! MacKey cant do a worse job than a TV-host. So we have everything to win on him or roberts debating! I will be very happy to see any ranking debunker appear against Charlie Sheen on mainsteam TV like Larry King Live. The more senior the better. If we take heads we would like them to be big ones.
bill smith Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 8,408	__________________ Think WTC7 - You cannot make the four corners of a table fall together unless you cut the four legs together A kitchen table judgement on a world scale is enough * To Citizens: 'There comes a time when silence is betrayal' Last edited by bill smith; 16th September 2009 at 01:52 AM.

16th September 2009, 01:52 AM	#149
911kongen Critical Thinker Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 363	Originally Posted by bill smith I will be very happy to see any ranking debunker appear against Charlie Sheen on mainsteam TV like Larry King Live. The more senior the better. If we take heads we would ike them to be big ones. Than can you call in to Alex Jones show and ask if Sheen is willing to debate Mark Roberts or Ryan MacKey? I bet he says yes, but it will never happen.. and thats not because Ryan or Mark said no... Sheen is going to bail out!! Just like Griffin!!

16th September 2009, 02:01 AM	#150
bill smith Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 8,408	Originally Posted by 911kongen Than can you call in to Alex Jones show and ask if Sheen is willing to debate Mark Roberts or Ryan MacKey? I bet he says yes, but it will never happen.. and thats not because Ryan or Mark said no... Sheen is going to bail out!! Just like Griffin!! The Challenge has been thrown down. Now it's up to your guys to pick it up. RM or another (ranking) debunker can easily send the email accepting the Challenge and preparations can begin. Otherwise Charlie (and the Truth Movement) are going to have an awful big stick to beat you with.
bill smith Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 8,408	__________________ Think WTC7 - You cannot make the four corners of a table fall together unless you cut the four legs together A kitchen table judgement on a world scale is enough * To Citizens: 'There comes a time when silence is betrayal' Last edited by bill smith; 16th September 2009 at 02:22 AM.

16th September 2009, 02:06 AM	#151
MysteryMammal Critical Thinker Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: In the woods, scaring campers Posts: 275	Originally Posted by bill smith I can imagine that you are reticent to appear on a show like Larry King. It would obviously be a huge risk because if for some reason it did not go well you would advance the progress of the Truth Movement by months if not cause an instant meltdown of the government story. This is not a criticism. just a statement of fact. Actually, it's speculation. Speculation is not fact. As for advancing the truth movement...

16th September 2009, 02:24 AM	#152
911kongen Critical Thinker Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 363	Originally Posted by bill smith The challenge has been thrown down. Now it's up to your guys to pick it up. RM or another (ranking) debunker can easily send the email accepting the Challenge and preparations can begin. Otherwise Charlie (and the Truth Movement) are going to have an awful big stick to beat you with. Personally im a bit disappointed that the well know debunkers is starting to give up conspiracy nuts like Griffin. Nuts say one thing, and does something else! I know Sheen will do the same... we debunkers see that, but not people like you. You see it as a victory! But thats not the point i debating Sheen. The point in debating Sheen is getting the facts out, and not let Sheen have a rant on a TV-show like Larry King... We need the people and familys of 911 to here our voice allso!

16th September 2009, 02:34 AM	#153
bill smith Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 8,408	Originally Posted by 911kongen Personally im a bit disappointed that the well know debunkers is starting to give up conspiracy nuts like Griffin. Nuts say one thing, and does something else! I know Sheen will do the same... we debunkers see that, but not people like you. You see it as a victory! But thats not the point i debating Sheen. The point in debating Sheen is getting the facts out, and not let Sheen have a rant on a TV-show like Larry King... We need the people and familys of 911 to here our voice allso! I agree absolutely that he point is to get the facts out to the wider population and jump-start the National debate. Many 9/11 families are Truthers too. [the rest deleted in the interests of staying on topic]
bill smith Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 8,408	__________________ Think WTC7 - You cannot make the four corners of a table fall together unless you cut the four legs together A kitchen table judgement on a world scale is enough * To Citizens: 'There comes a time when silence is betrayal' Last edited by bill smith; 16th September 2009 at 03:06 AM.

16th September 2009, 02:58 AM	#154
MysteryMammal Critical Thinker Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: In the woods, scaring campers Posts: 275	Originally Posted by bill smith I agree absolutely that he point is to get the facts out to the wider population and jump-start the National debate. Many 9/11 families are Truthers too. 400 family members already brought a class-action murder suit against Bush and Co in 2004. The warrents were even served on Bush personally. But a friendly judge dismissed the case on the grounds of 'sovereign immunity '....(the King is exempt from prosecution). But you must have read about this in the papers ? It's another story anyway for another day. I have not read about this. Linky, please?

16th September 2009, 03:08 AM	#155
bill smith Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 8,408	Originally Posted by MysteryMammal I have not read about this. Linky, please? Look up ' Stanley Hilton lawsuit ' but start a new thread if you want to discuss it please.
bill smith Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 8,408	__________________ Think WTC7 - You cannot make the four corners of a table fall together unless you cut the four legs together A kitchen table judgement on a world scale is enough * To Citizens: 'There comes a time when silence is betrayal'