• 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.

The Gravy Debunks Robert Steele Thread

Usual Suspect said:
However I'm not here for that or to reply to any of Wildcats below average intelligence posts.
Click to expand...

That from a man making dozens of consecutive posts accusing people of "straw man"...

:rolleyes:

What have you contributed to this discussion US?

Even if Gravy could debunk Steele it won't change my mind
Click to expand...

So why did you keep asking for his reply? Why start two threads about it when you knew it wouldn't change a thing for you?

That's called trolling, and bullying.

I'm not taking an NIST, FEMA or an gov't agency report on Building 7 as evidence. I feel it's slanted and always will. Thus any other evidence based on it proves nothing in my eyes.
Click to expand...

Then there's absolutely nothing we can do to help you. If you prefer the "science" of CT sites, then you my friend are lost.

So no harm. no foul.
Click to expand...

Actually, there is harm and foul. You accused people of being disrespectful of the firefighters of NY but have not produced any evidence of that. That makes it a mean, vicious and unfounded attack.

Usual Suspect said:
Nothing you, a narrowminded person is willing to believe.
Click to expand...

That's what you don't understand, US. People here, as far as I know, don't believe blindly. We have to rely on solid evidence to "believe" in something.

You have shown no evidence whatsoever. Especially you US, you didn't even try.

I'm a kid who has to mature
Click to expand...

No comment.
 
What is there to debunk? In the Prison Planet article, all I see is the following:

While Steele stopped short of saying 9/11 was a complete inside job, he agreed that the evidence points to the overwhelming complicity of the Bush administration.

"The U.S. government did not properly investigate this and there are more rocks to be turned over," said Steele adding, "I'm absolutely certain that WTC 7 was brought down by controlled demolition and that as far as I'm concerned means that this case has not been properly investigated."

"There's no way that building could have come down without controlled demolition."

Steele pointed the finger of suspicion directly at the Vice President saying, "There's no question in my own mind that Dick Cheney is the tar baby in this whole thing."

Steele outlined the bizarre circumstances preceding the attack that would have greased the skids for bombs to be planted in the buildings.

"You do have the whole issue of the security cameras being disengaged, the bomb sniffing dogs being removed, the family ties with Bush - I mean if you smell a rotten fish there's probably a rotten fish somewhere around."
Click to expand...

Facts presented? None. Opinions voiced about WTC 7, Vice President Cheney and the significance of the removal of the bomb-sniffing dogs. Opinions where Steele's background gives him some credibility? Arguably the Cheney quote.

Counter arguments? Even Loose Change admits that the bomb-sniffing dogs were an extraordinary measure that ended a week or so before 9-11. So it's not the absence of the dogs that is remarkable; it's their presence earlier.

The other two articles aren't about Steele's 9-11 nuttiness.:rolleyes:
 
Brainster said:
The other two articles aren't about Steele's 9-11 nuttiness.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

That's what's strange about it. I googled his name, and found absolutely nothing of reliable source that indicates he's advocating the CTs. Only the CT sites say this.
 
'Tar baby'?

Isn't that....like.... RACIST?

I seem to recall Snow got into trouble for using that term.

Tsk tsk

The CT'ers do get into bed with some interesting people.
 
US:

The difference here is you are asking someone to "Debunk" a person's opinion. You cannot do so, as it is only an opinion. The right or wrong of an opinion is the perspective.

Over at the LC Forum, the claims were made without evidence to back them up, that is why people here felt the arguments were weak. You will find it hard to find a statement made here, regarding the 9/11 attacks, that can't be backed up with solid evidence and/or expert opinion.

TAM
 
uk_dave said:
'Tar baby'?

Isn't that....like.... RACIST?
Click to expand...
It's not racist, it just refers to getting stuck on something you can't get away from. From the old Uncle Remus stories many of us here in the USA grew up on many years ago.
 
Pardalis said:
That's what's strange about it. I googled his name, and found absolutely nothing of reliable source that indicates he's advocating the CTs. Only the CT sites say this.
Click to expand...

Oh, I think he's legit alright. He first drew attention with a positive review of Tarpley's Synthetic Terror; 9-11 Blogger crowed that he was the #1 non-fiction reviewer at Amazon. I don't know if that's true; he was a top 100 reviewer when I checked. It also gave the "real name" sign for him.

More important is that he's a typical "expert witness" for 9-11 Denial; his area of expertise has almost nothing to do with his claims. Like Waterboy Kevin Ryan, Dental Engineer Judy Wood and Philosophy of Science Professor Jim Fetzer, Steele draws on none of his training to make 9-11 charges.
 
Brainster said:
Oh, I think he's legit alright. He first drew attention with a positive review of Tarpley's Synthetic Terror; 9-11 Blogger crowed that he was the #1 non-fiction reviewer at Amazon. I don't know if that's true; he was a top 100 reviewer when I checked. It also gave the "real name" sign for him.

More important is that he's a typical "expert witness" for 9-11 Denial; his area of expertise has almost nothing to do with his claims. Like Waterboy Kevin Ryan, Dental Engineer Judy Wood and Philosophy of Science Professor Jim Fetzer, Steele draws on none of his training to make 9-11 charges.
Click to expand...

It's the American way. :duck:
 
Usual Suspect said:
I'd rather point out how your mature self was able to walk away. Bye WildCat.
Click to expand...

sheeesh...........was kind of looking forwrd to a good old tear-up.

say what you like about christophera. at least he will present "evidence" to back up his claims. even if he is madder than Mad Jack McMad, the winner of this year's Mr Madman competition.........

US is a light-weight in comparison.

BV
 
Just a coincidence...you be the judge.

Ever since the downfall of the LC Forum due to Uncontrolled Demolition, We have seen a bounty of CTers show up here with no evidence, just opinion and "asking questions". Seems as if we have picked up the sloppy seconds...well I am having none of that...lol

TAM
 
Usual Suspect said:
Much like Craig Bartmer it wasn't fair of me to put out Robert Steele and think Gravy would be ready to debunk him in minutes. So just as with Bartmer I will start this thread. I only posted 3 links on Steele and will post the same 3 here however Gravy knows there's more to debunk. I will apologize again for calling Gravy a Straw Man since I didn't give him anytime to get info together to debunk Steele. Gravy asked me to answer some questions which I did. You can ask Russ Pickering and JessicaRabbit about that. So now I ask Gravy to debunk Robert Steele. I will start checking back tomorrow as I wait for Gravy to debunk Steele

Steele 1

Steele 2

Steele 3

Gravy knows he can search for more to debunk. Tomorrow I will start checking in once a day as I wait for Gravy to debunk Steele.
Click to expand...

Watson?

can you just debunk it because PrisonPlanet thinks it has merit

I have found all of PrisonPlanet to be self debunking, have things change over there?
 
How can you debunk an opinion?? that is all this guy offers, is it not?

ok...i'll give it a go.

Robert Steele...you are wrong.

TAM:)
 
"The U.S. government did not properly investigate this and there are more rocks to be turned over," said Steele adding, "I'm absolutely certain that WTC 7 was brought down by controlled demolition and that as far as I'm concerned means that this case has not been properly investigated."

Steele is just another nut case with no evidence or facts.

He has some idea on intel, they may have merit.

But who thinks he has anything on WTC7 except hearsay or less?​
 
it is not that outrageous (is it?) that organisations such as the CIA, MI5, FSB et al will have compromised google as a weapon in "the war on terror" cheltenham GCHQ in the UK is an infamous sophisticated highly secret utility that specialises in eavesdropping on all manner of electronic communications worldwide. it's activities are generally well-documented. the question is though, as intimated by steele, whether google are "in bed" with the spooks. hard one to tackle that.
obviously, a difficult task to prove/disprove. and US knows it.

BV
 
Last edited:
He is a disturbed man steelo. He uses google on his oss.net site to search it. I think im confused now. Is that the same guy?
 
Pardalis said:
That's what's strange about it. I googled his name, and found absolutely nothing of reliable source that indicates he's advocating the CTs. Only the CT sites say this.
Click to expand...

It all stems from that book review he wrote on like October 7. He's the flavor of the month.

One month it's Lauro Chavez, then it Colonel Donn de Grand Pre, now it's Steele. AJ and friends must be trawling the web for anyone who voices a pro-conspiracy theory, and invited him on with the author of the book being reviewed.

I think others may latch on, but I think there are going to be a lot who are going to shy away from his illuminati pov.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom