• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Loose Change - Part IV

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm from New Jersey as well and my town in particular lost 27 people (if I remember correctly). There was an article written about the Catholic church in my town on the front page of the Star Ledger because of all the funerals we were holding for 9/11 victims.

My brother's friend lost his father in the attack. His mother spoke at the dedication ceremony of a new memorial in my town dedicated to those killed on 9/11. Tell her and all the others who lost loved ones your views on 9/11.
 
T.A.M. said:
That article brought tears of joy to my eyes.

J.R. Dunn is my new hero. Boohyah

TAM
Click to expand...


I found two things very interesting about this article...

Firstly, I was stunned by Fez's letter. It was pathetic. I'd expect arguments like that from the goons at the LC Forums. But from the leader of their movement? From a man with a PhD?

It was appalling. A joke. The number of factual errors are laughable. While I had previously considered the enjoyment of tangling with people like Fetzer and Jones, I previously thought it was a rather large undertaking. Not simply squabbling with some idiots.

I adjust that assessment. Tangling with people like them would be as easy as stealing candy from a very stupid baby.

Second major observation,

Dunn's rebuttal is pretty weak. Admittedly I haven't read his first one, but this second one is not great at all. I'd say there'd be at least a dozen (probably twice that or more) here on JREF who could put up a far better showing. Hell, I reckon I could have Fez for breakfast! And there are plenty of others that dwarf my knowledge.

Dunn himself uses very little specifics, and makes some pretty big factual errors of his own (the NORAD defense springs to mind).

I'm not that impressed, by either of them.

(Wow? Am I becoming a 9/11 expert? :D)

-Andrew

ETA. Dunn also fails to pick Fez up on some glaring errors - for example the JT8D reference and the "Boeings have Pratt and Whitney Engines" reference. The A-3 Skywarrior does not use the JT8D engine (uses 2x PW J57-P-10 turbojets), and AAL Boeing 757's use the Rolls Royce RB211 engine.
 
Last edited:
gumboot said:
Firstly, I was stunned by Fez's letter. It was pathetic. I'd expect arguments like that from the goons at the LC Forums. But from the leader of their movement? From a man with a PhD?

It was appalling. A joke. The number of factual errors are laughable. While I had previously considered the enjoyment of tangling with people like Fetzer and Jones, I previously thought it was a rather large undertaking. Not simply squabbling with some idiots.

I adjust that assessment. Tangling with people like them would be as easy as stealing candy from a very stupid baby.
Click to expand...

Uncle Fetzer's indeed quite pathetic. He's Jason Bermas without Bermas' photographic memory (What was that other country Hitler invaded?). But don't discount his ability to argue/debate skillfully on his feet. He knows how to duck a (rhetorical) punch, and I'm sure he's got a list of dodges he can use for virtually any line of questioning. But the fact that he endorses just about every stupid theory in Loose Change certainly makes him an attractive target.

It's interesting to hear the "missile just before the plane" theory at the Pentagon. Phil Jayhan was right, he just had the wrong building. ;)
 
gumboot said:
I found two things very interesting about this article...

Firstly, I was stunned by Fez's letter. It was pathetic. I'd expect arguments like that from the goons at the LC Forums. But from the leader of their movement? From a man with a PhD?

It was appalling. A joke. The number of factual errors are laughable. While I had previously considered the enjoyment of tangling with people like Fetzer and Jones, I previously thought it was a rather large undertaking. Not simply squabbling with some idiots.

I adjust that assessment. Tangling with people like them would be as easy as stealing candy from a very stupid baby.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Though I have seen Fetzer as the messenger all along. Everytime I have seen him speak he merely regurgitates the CT line.

gumboot said:
Second major observation,

Dunn's rebuttal is pretty weak. Admittedly I haven't read his first one, but this second one is not great at all. I'd say there'd be at least a dozen (probably twice that or more) here on JREF who could put up a far better showing. Hell, I reckon I could have Fez for breakfast! And there are plenty of others that dwarf my knowledge.

Dunn himself uses very little specifics, and makes some pretty big factual errors of his own (the NORAD defense springs to mind).

I'm not that impressed, by either of them.

(Wow? Am I becoming a 9/11 expert? :D)

-Andrew

ETA. Dunn also fails to pick Fez up on some glaring errors - for example the JT8D reference and the "Boeings have Pratt and Whitney Engines" reference. The A-3 Skywarrior does not use the JT8D engine (uses 2x PW J57-P-10 turbojets), and AAL Boeing 757's use the Rolls Royce RB211 engine.
Click to expand...

Yes even I picked up most of those. I would disagree with your assessment of Dunn though. He is not a 9/11 expert. He hasn't made this issue his mission as so many have here. he rebutted Fetzer with little time to prepare. I say give the man 2 weeks reading these threads....well then holy shaite. It was his skill at argumentation that i found so inspiring. Weak compared to lets say you, Mackey, Brainster, Gravy, and so many of the others here, yes, but c/w Fetzer...far from weak.

TAM
 
CptColumbo said:
Here's another one of the leaders of the "truth" movement.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reQZT9Hzvt8&eurl=

Notice how he uses the phrases "we don't know" and "we don't understand."

So he seems to be saying that he can't make his case, but it makes more sense than what everyone saw.
Click to expand...

A Professor of Economics!? My god, with that kind of expertise how can we doubt the findings of Scholars For Truth.
 
Oh, and anyone want to answer this poor sods questions...he seems to think there is no proof of AA77, or Barbara Olson being on any flight that day...I had to post it, as it is so pathetic...


Posted by Nozebro - Mon Sep-18-06 07:15 PM at DU:
There's really _____ else TO see. If ANY kind of airplane had crashed at that site, there would be evidence of it in at least some of the many photos that have already been released.

The Pentagon/FL 77 lies are a much better key to understanding that 9/11 was an inside job. There's no proof of any such flight as AA 77 on 9/11, and if there had been such a flight on that day, there WOULD be official records of it. There's no proof of reservation/ticket/check-in of Mrs. Barbara Olson having been on an AA FL 77 on 9/11, we've seen photos of alleged "hijackers"
at Dulles that day, but not one photo allegedly showing Mrs. Olson there. Besides, NO airport, taxi driver, boarding agent, security agent or anyone else has ever said they saw Mrs. Olson at Dulles Airport on 911.

If Mrs. Olson had called her husband from ANY airplane on 9/11, where's the proof? Where is there one word from anyone at the U.S. Department of Justice saying they took a call from her and transferred it to her husband?

You don't have to get into an endless argument loop over whether or not the ludicrous claims about Hani Hanjours 270 degree turn are true, and you don't have to allow the OCT'ers to try and confuse the issue about the impossibility of an airliner flying a feet off the ground. Likewise, it's not necessary to get into arguments over whether the OCT Faith-Based Theory of whether confetti is a sufficient substitute for ACTUAL engineS, blood, luggage, seats, body parts, or any of the rest.

There is no need to "see" anything else from any other cameras at or near the Pentagon, to know that a large commercial airliner did NOT crash at the Pentagon on 9/11/01.

Likewise, there is no need to demand the impossible from the OCT'ers here. They cannot produce (credible) proof of something that didn't happen and it's futile to wish otherwise.
Click to expand...

TAM
 
JamesB said:
Loose Change forum paranoid post of the day.

Damn Those Screw Loose Change A-holes, They're sneaky



http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=14316

I tried a bunch of misspellings, but couldn't get it to work.
Click to expand...

I tried "www.losechange911.com" and got sent to "online Video Clips"

www.looosechange911.com - sends me to a generic web site.

www.loosechenge911.com - ditto

www.loosechange910.com - address not found

Shall I try some more...lol

TAM
 
Brainster said:
It's interesting to hear the "missile just before the plane" theory at the Pentagon. Phil Jayhan was right, he just had the wrong building. ;)
Click to expand...

That was from that radio interview with the guy who installed kitchen cabinets, who knew the CIA assassin named the mechanic, and believed every event connected to 9/11 occurred in the Denver Metropolitan area. For those of you new to this topic, no, I am not making that up.

http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2006/07/just-when-you-thought-it-couldnt-get.html

He also neglected to mention that this theory was started by my man Karl Schwarz!
 
T.A.M. said:
Oh, and anyone want to answer this poor sods questions...he seems to think there is no proof of AA77, or Barbara Olson being on any flight that day...I had to post it, as it is so pathetic...


Posted by Nozebro - Mon Sep-18-06 07:15 PM at DU:


TAM
Click to expand...

He clearly hasn't a brain, so explanation will be useless.
 
Just for fun, I googled "loose change forums" and the very first hit was...

Loose Change - JREF Forum
Loose Change Conspiracy Theories. ... Welcome to the JREF Forum, where we discuss skepticism, ... Just type in "Loose Change" if you hate your brain. ...
forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=53102 - 250k - Cached - Similar pages
Click to expand...
 
T.A.M. said:
Oh, and anyone want to answer this poor sods questions...he seems to think there is no proof of AA77, or Barbara Olson being on any flight that day...I had to post it, as it is so pathetic...


Posted by Nozebro - Mon Sep-18-06 07:15 PM at DU:


TAM
Click to expand...
These people are so far removed from the actual events of that day it's frightening. In their minds, unless it happened to them, it never happened. And it's not like they ask for proof to understand things better. They willingly disregard any evidence that doesn't conform to their preconceptions of the government....

This is the future of this country?
 
T.A.M. said:
Not sure if this has been looked at and torn down yet, but if anyone is interested, here is Griffins latest article, this one on the "Norad/FAA" tapes.

Griffin Article - NORAD/FAA Tapes

enjoy

TAM
Click to expand...


I got as far as his "Did the 9/11 Commission fake the NORAD tapes?" bit and stopped.

The guy is obsessively convinced of his own nefarious opinions. In other words he is full of BS.

As usual, with the NORAD 9/11 commission testimony inaccuracies issue, the CTers are reading WAY too much into it (are we surprised? They read too much into EVERYTHING).

Some of his assertations about the NORAD tapes are false as well - for example that NEADS weren't told about UA175, AA77 and UA93 until after they crashed - it was only UA93 that was reported post-crash.

His assertations that the original NORAD testimony left them open to charges of murder and treason is also completely false. The question is, if the commission and NORAD together fabricated the tapes, why the entire fiasco with the false testimonies anyway? What was the point? Why not come out with version 1 or version 2 and stick to it from day one?

Frankly I'm more willing to call the original NORAD testimony simply confusion. The commission thought there was intentional false testimony, but I am not convinced of this. Everyone ignores just how busy NEADS was on 9/11 - there were false hijacking alerts aplenty - 11 incidents in the first 90 minutes. After 9/11 NORAD was so over-stretched with Operation Noble Eagle that I suspect no one even listened to the original tapes - I suspect it took so long for the commission to get them because they had to be found first.

In short, when the NORAD staff went before the commission, I doubt they had heard the tapes, and I suspect the only information they had about 9/11 was after-action reports from NEADS. I would expect these to be rather confused.

The "Fog of War" is not a feature exclusive to foreign battlefields.

-Andrew
 
Gravy: Nice Job!

On one of these pages in one of these LC threads, I poked fun at those of you who still continue to "bang your heads against the wall" with these CT'ers. Well, I have returned to say that I have joined your ranks, though in the "real world" rather than on JREF ;)

A few weeks ago, the front page of our local "Metro" newspaper had conspiracy theory headlines plastered all over the front, including a photo of the collapsing towers.

Long story short, I ended up pointing a customer of mine toward "Gravy's Loose Change debunk" and the guy is now thoroughly convinced that the CT'ers are full of crap. He still wants to know about the lack of debris in PA, but other than that he's on our side.


Gravy:
He thought your work was outstanding and was utterly amazed at the amount of research and compiling you've done. He just couldn't say enough good things.

Nice work, and sorry I poked fun.
 
njslim said:
Maybe introduce this moonbat to my neighbor in the apartment across the
hall - her 2 sons worked at Cantor Fitzgerald in North Tower. Both died
that day ......
Click to expand...

Not to sound supportive of CTers, but although we keep repeating that, here, it really isn't an argument, except to show that, perhaps, anonymity gives those CTers more guts than they really have.
 
Belz... said:
Not to sound supportive of CTers, but although we keep repeating that, here, it really isn't an argument, except to show that, perhaps, anonymity gives those CTers more guts than they really have.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the perfect example is that bastard Killtown. He thinks anonymity gives him impunity to attack innocent people's reputation. :mad:
 
Last edited:
I'm very sorry to keep going back to early in this thread, but I'm still reading through it. And if I wait and see if this was addressed before until I'm finished, trust me, I'll forget it. I have a good memory, but it's short.

This is from a very long post by Gravy, so I don't want to quote the whole thing. The particular post is at

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1636384&postcount=3750

Believe me, I'm on you Jref'ers sides. I am simply amazed at the gullibility and utter incoherence of these Loosers.

Gravy was refuting an email he'd received that was trying to debunk his debunking of LC (boy is THAT convoluted). The quote below is with regard to the "no plane" hit the Pentagon.

A 100 ton plane is gone, with very little debris, and very
> little other items are reported yet we are to believe that the 100 ton plane
> dissolves but bodies can be identified.
Click to expand...

If it wasn't a plane, where do these people think the bodies came from? He's admitting to the bodies. They were stuffed inside the missile perhaps?? Seems to me that wouldn't leave much room for ordinance.

(of course, i'm still tittering inside about the hermetically sealed elevators. how could they open the doors against a hard vacuum?)
 
Jennie C. said:


If it wasn't a plane, where do these people think the bodies came from? He's admitting to the bodies. They were stuffed inside the missile perhaps?? Seems to me that wouldn't leave much room for ordinance.

(of course, i'm still tittering inside about the hermetically sealed elevators. how could they open the doors against a hard vacuum?)
Click to expand...

the same interdimensional portal that also placed all those plane debris around; you know the ones he does have people in his video carrying away, yet he says just before that, that "hardly any debris" were found?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom